Analysis of Negotiation and Conflict Management Project Outcomes

This project analyzes a commercial property negotiation scenario, exploring the pre-negotiation phase, the negotiation process itself, and the post-negotiation outcomes. The student identifies their dominant thinking style (Hierarchic) and assesses its suitability for the negotiation, making recommendations for adjustments. The assignment includes defining the client's BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) and reservation value, and determining the Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA). The negotiation involves a buyer and seller, with the student playing the role of the seller's agent. The project outlines the offers, counteroffers, and the final agreement reached, emphasizing the importance of ZOPA. The post-negotiation section includes a letter summarizing the deal, including the final agreed price and the rationale behind it, highlighting the negotiation dynamics and the factors influencing the final outcome.

Thinking Styles, Negotiation and Conflict
Management

Table of Contents
Stage 1: Pre-negotiation...................................................................................................................3
1. What is your thinking style preference form...........................................................................3
2. Are your thinking style preferences – form and scope – optimal for conducting this
negotiation?..................................................................................................................................4
3. What adjustments (if any) could you make to adapt to a more optimal thinking style for this
negotiation?..................................................................................................................................4
4. What is your client’s BATNA? What is your client’s reservation value?...............................4
5...................................................................................................................................................4
6. What is the ZOPA range? What is your strategy for claiming the greater proportion of the
ZOPA?.........................................................................................................................................5
Stage 2: Negotiation........................................................................................................................6
1. Enter negotiations with your counterpart for the sale and purchase of the commercial asset;6
Stage 3: Post negotiation.................................................................................................................7

Stage 1: Pre-negotiation
1. What is your thinking style preference form
Based on the result, my thinking style is Hierarchic; and the scope of thinking style is internal
within organization.
Monarchic: The monarch prefers promises, initiatives and situations that allow full attention to
something or a particular vision over time until it is ready. A person based in a monarchy is firm
and often assertive and likes to finish one thing before proceeding to the next.
Hierarchic: The hierarchical person prefers assignments, commitments and situations that allow
progress to meet goals. This person likes to do different things in a given time, but satisfies
different needs to complete them. Individuals from multiple rankings will generally find
themselves in a number of situations where it is important to set the requirements to complete
some things before others, or where it is important to conclude that some things are more worthy
of consideration than Others are.
Oligarchic: The oligarchic person prefers mistakes, actions and situations that allow him to work
with methods of conquest, with different angles or goals that are equally important. This person,
like the one who is gradually set up, jumps to the opportunity to do different things within a
certain time, but has a hard time setting that needs to be completed when. Those who are
oligarchically positioned in this way will change well if the controversial applications are usually
identical, but it will be more difficult if the needs differ.
Anarchic: The anarchist person has a penchant for promises, initiatives and situations that have
lent themselves to incredible flexibility of approaches, and for trying anything when, where and
how that person is satisfied. This individual will usually be a meticulous foe or even an approach
foe. In general, the person adopts a non-normative strategy and is sometimes difficult for others
to understand.
Result:
Monarchic = 32%
Hierarchic =55%
Oligarchic = 3%
Anarchic = 10%

2. Are your thinking style preferences – form and scope – optimal for
conducting this negotiation?
Is my thinking style preferences is optimal for conduction this negotiation. Hierarchic can do
multiple things together and accomplished the task within given time period. In this situation,
there’s no conflict between both parties; but Shami is doing one side negotiation by make deal on
his suggested price.
3. What adjustments (if any) could you make to adapt to a more optimal
thinking style for this negotiation?
The optimal thinking style requires to adopt is Hierarchic but in external scope; where in
negotiation process more people could be involved to have better decision and achieve optimum
negotiation.
4. What is your client’s BATNA? What is your client’s reservation value?
BATNA is an abbreviation that represents the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. It is
identified as the most favorable election option a group meeting can take if relationships fail and
agreement cannot be reached. Therefore, BATNA is a collection option if the configuration is
not successful. BATNA is often used in trading strategies and should be regularly considered
before a contract occurs. It is never wise to enter into a virtual exchange without knowing your
BATNA.
In the given case, Clients BATNA is $42.5 Million; as Rahee offered $42.5 Million to Shami to
purchase the commercial property.
Reservation value is lowest amount agreed by client. Client is agreed to sale the property not less
than $39.5 Million. Thus it is the reserve value for the client.
The original rate has a scope of declining by 10%. Hence, the BATNA value of other party will
be 10% of $45 million which is $40.5 Million.
5.
The other party wants to pay only $38.5 million which is 10% lower price of agreed price by
client ($42.5 Million); thus it is the reservation value for other client.

6. What is the ZOPA range? What is your strategy for claiming the greater
proportion of the ZOPA?
There is a "Zone of Possible Agreement" (ZOPA- - also known as "gamma haggis") if one is
aware that both parties would be more profitable than the chosen options. It is only a matter of
place, the area of possible conciliation or the treatment area is considered an area in which at
least two conciliation agreements receive a shared view. This is the area where meetings often
negotiate and reach an agreement. All to organize meetings to find or agree on a solution, they
should pursue a common goal and look for an area that reinforces a part of the ideas of each
meeting. No matter what the exchange rate is, reconciliation can never be achieved outside the
realm of plausible understanding. To reach an effective agreement, the parties should understand
each other's requirements, characteristics and interests.
When the parties cannot reach ZOPA, they are in the realm of negative treatment. An agreement
cannot be reached in a negative haggis zone, as the requirements and wishes, all things being
equal, cannot be fulfilled by an agreement entered into under these conditions. Nonetheless,
negative treatment zones can survive if the conciliatory parties are desperate for each other's
efforts and needs.
Meetings should know what their options are for any settlement. Roger Fisher and William Ury
commented on “BATNA” (a better alternative to a negotiated agreement). This is the best
strategy a meeting can follow if an agreed understanding is not reached. In fact, he may succeed
at the chance that a meeting will not realize that his BATNA is not in line with what he thought,
or choose another reason for recognizing the contract, despite the fact that a particular option
could provide better results. (This often happens when meetings don't explore or understand the
surrounding BATNAs, okay, so they agree on what they might get elsewhere).
In the given case; the minimum price at which client is ready to pay is $39.5 Million; and other
party wants to down the price to $38.5 Million. Thus, if the other party quote the price $39.5
Million to client than it will be positive ZOPA; on the other hand, if other party doesn’t agree to
pay $39.5 Million to client then it will termed as negative ZOPA.

Stage 2: Negotiation
1. Enter negotiations with your counterpart for the sale and purchase of the
commercial asset;
Subject: Agent Authority & Instructions - Purchase of Commercial Property 65 Bakersfield
Road, St Kilda, Melbourne
Agent Authority & Instructions - Purchase of Commercial Property 65 Bakersfield Road, St
Kilda, Melbourne
The first offer Rahee made was $42.5 million that Shami refused as Shami was only willing to
pay less than quoted price of $42.5 million. Rahee already reduced his price from $45 Million to
$42.5 million. Now, it’s upon Shami whether he is agreed to purchase the property at the offer
price of Rahee. If he refused to pay this price, then it will be turn of Shami to quote price by
offering desired price to Rahee.
Shami wants to pay only $38.5 Million to buy the property. But reserve value of Rahee is $39.5
Million below that it will get into negative zone. Rahee also prefer to close the deal to his desired
area rather than worst offer by Shami.
Finally, Shami made an offer $39.5million which was agreed by Rahee as it was under his eserve
value. This value was also lie under ZOPA; and result into positive value of BATNA and ZOPA
both. The ZOPA / barter range is critical in the actual output of the configuration. However,
determining the existence of ZOPA can take some effort; it could happen once collections
explore their different advantages and options. Given that ZOPA cannot be recognized by
controversy, chances are they have a choice.
Therefore, a range of understanding is possible if there is coverage between these leave
positions. If not, the arrangement may not be successful. And at last, we made a final deal on
AUD39.5million and signed agreement by both parties, about their concern and agreement on
ZOPA value.

Stage 3: Post negotiation
Dear Rahee,
You owe a lot to your praise. We sincerely appreciate the effort you have made to present a very
comprehensive proposal for our organization.
We understand that you would have invested a lot of energy and resources to think about this
proposition which is designed for subtleties on how to provide what we need.
My whole group and I have looked at the whole proposal and we are very satisfied with it. At the
same time, there is a key issue that may be preventing us from giving you this deal.
Let me clarify:
Our Vice President has provided us with a specific spending plan for this deal. It has also taught
our group agreements to receive 3 more statements from various suppliers, pending a thorough
evaluation.
For my part, I figured out how to get us to rely on getting quotes from different suppliers,
because you've done a commendable job in the past. I promised him that we would get this deal
within the cost he provided. He accepted, however, with the possibility that we could not get the
cost you are proposing within our spending plan, at which point we would have to open it to 3
other suppliers.
Again, I could not want anything more than to be your supplier. However, in order to do this, we
want your cost to be better than what you mentioned in your proposal below. Cost should be 9%
lower with AUD final cost of 39.5 million.
The first offer made was $42.5 million that Shami refused as Shami was only willing to pay less
than quoted price of $42.5 million. We already reduced his price from $45 Million to $42.5
million. Now, it’s upon Shami whether he is agreed to purchase the property at the offer price of
Rahee. If he refused to pay this price, then it will be turn of Shami to quote price by offering
desired price to you.
Shami wants to pay only $38.5 Million to buy the property. But reserve value of Yours was
$39.5 Million below that it will get into negative zone. I also prefer to close the deal to his
desired area rather than worst offer by Shami.
On the off chance that you can't offer this value, I'm worried that we'll have to look at different
providers for this job.
Again, I look forward to hearing from you. I believe you understand that we have been strong
customers for you in the past and I am sure you should be flexible in your offer to work in the
future for you and your society later.

Looking forward to reaching you by October 20th.
Best Regards
Farnsworth Property Trust
Agent Authority & Instructions