Forms of Thinking Style

Discuss about the Automatic Classification of Negotiation Styles.

There are various forms or thinking styles and scope which are available to a person for the purpose of carrying out negotiation (Pinkley et al. 2018). The forms of thinking style includes monarchic, hierarchic, oligarchic and anarchic.  In the monarchic form of thinking the person is focused on only one objective and till the time the objective has been achieved by the person they do not go for another objective, plan or goal (Coburn  2015). In the situation of a Hierarchic form of thinking style the person tends to carry out many activities in a certain time. This style allows a person to behave in a realistic, logical and organized manner (Su, Chen and Ro 2017). The oligarchic style is for those who are nervous and confused and gave conflicting goals. All goals have equal importance to them. In relation to the Anarchic method they tend to take into consideration methods which are random and non compliant with a specific order with respect to solving the problems (Pacella et al 2017).  The thinking style which is preferred by me is that of Anarchic (Tu 2014). This thinking style helps me to have a predilection in relation to projects, tasks and situations in which I can provide enhanced flexibility in relation to approaches and can try anything how , when and where I want to (McFadden 2014). The approach allows me the opportunity to take different approaches in relation to problems which may be at time difficult for other people to understand. This form of thinking helps me to use a way which is different and non compliant in a specific order to address the problem (Tu 2015). This allows me to have a better performance in relation disorganized situations. There are two scope of thinking style one is the external scope and the other is the internal scope (Carbonneau and Vahidov 2014). In case of internal scope the people who follow it chose to operate in an individual manner. These people are introvert and want to act in an alone (Rahim 2017). These people have internal focus and prefer analytical and creative problems (Mahmoud 2015). The other scope is the external scope (Neuliep and Johnson 2016). In this scope the people who follow it want to collaborate and work with others in a team and tend to have a sense of social contact with the other people easily and comfortably (Zarei, Hassannejad and Ganjouei 2016).   In relation to scope I prefer to use the external scope through which I may have a predilection in relation to projects, situations and tasks which allow me to work with others in the group along with allowance to interact with others at various stages of progress. This is because I prefer to work with others as I am extraverted and totally comfortable in group settings (Elfenbein 2015).

Scopes of Thinking Style

In the given situation I have been appointed to negotiate in relation to the sale of an asset. There are various strategies which are available in relation to carrying out sale negotiations thus the process is not organized and requires random approaches in relation to the situation (Ting?Toomey 2015). In addition while ensure that the assent is sold in the terms which are favorable to the client it has to be ensured that I work along with others to negotiate the sales in favor of my client. In relation to sales I must collaborate and work with others in a team and also have to have a sense of social contact with the other people easily and comfortably. The external scope which is followed by me would thus help to appropriately negotiate the sale (Dell’Aquila et al 2017).

Yes there are a few adjustments which will be required by me in relation to the form of my thinking. In the given situation the form of thinking which has been selected by me is that of anarchic. In this situation I have very flexible approaches in relation to resolving problems. However in relation to the situation where I need to negotiate with respect to the sale of a valuable asset I must have a fixed plan in mind. This form is thinking is that of monarchic. In order to ensure that the type of thinking style I have selected for the purpose of carrying out this negotiation I need to combine the monarchic and anarchic form of thinking. Through this I would be able to have a fixed plan as well as I can be flexible as and when required.

In this situation the Best Alternative To Negotiable Agreement which are available to my clients are that

• The value of the property is about $16.5 million to $17.5 million thus it would not be difficult to find a potential buyer for the property.
• There is also another potential buyer Icarus Corp which has a price of $15.6 million which can be increased to about 10%.
• The reservation value in relation to the client should be that of around $16.5 million.

In this situation the Best Alternative To Negotiable Agreement which are available to the other party are that

They may invest in an another asset which is on the same kind and has a less price

They may wait for the investments as they are in no hurry to indulge in the purchase of the assets.

The reservation value in relation to the other party should be that of around $16 million as they well be willing to pay more than Icarus Corp

The zone of possible agreement is known as ZOPA. In this situation the zone may be that of around 16.5 Millions which the reservation price is for my client.  In the given situation the best strategy would be let the other party about the value of the property in that reason.

• I had a conversation with the buyer in relation to the sale of the property located at 63 Bradury Street, Mooroolbank, Melbourne. We started the conversation by talking about the details in relation to the property.
• We started the conversation by talking about the details in relation to the property.
• I told the representative of the bar cat the property is located at a very prime location and it’s going to be a very profitable investment for them.
• The primary intention of the buyer in this case was to reduce the price which we have offered for the sale of the property.
• Their representatives offered me a price of 15 million dollars for the property which I instantly rejected by letting them know that we already have buyer who is willing to purchase the property at 17 million dollars.
• The buyer again offered me a price of 16.5 million dollars and I took some time to think about it.
• I took into consideration the value of the property which is around $16.5 to 17.5 million.

Negotiation Strategies

I want to want to let you know that I had a conversation with the buyer in relation to the sale of the property located at 63 Bradury Street, Mooroolbank, Melbourne. We started the conversation by talking about the details in relation to the property. I told the representative of the bar cat the property is located at a very prime location and it’s going to be a very profitable investment for them.

The primary intention of the buyer in this case was to reduce the price which we have offered for the sale of the property. They were very interested in purchasing the property as they were made aware of the way in which the property would be suitable for the business. Their representatives offered me a price of 15 million dollars for the property which I instantly rejected by letting them know that we already have buyer who is willing to purchase the property at 17 million dollars.

While doing so I was very careful about their BATNA which includes they may invest in an another asset which is on the same kind and has a less price, They may wait for the investments as they are in no hurry to indulge in the purchase of the assets and The reservation value in relation to the other party should be that of around $16 million as they well be willing to pay more than Icarus Corp and out BATNA which is The value of the property is about $16.5 million to $17.5 million thus it would not be difficult to find a potential buyer for the property.

There is also another potential buyer Icarus Corp which has a price of $15.6 million which can be increased to about 10%, The reservation value in relation to the client should be that of around $16.5 million. The buyer again offered me a price of 16.5 million dollars and I took some time to think about it. I took into consideration the value of the property which is around $16.5 to 17.5 million. I feel that we should sell the property to them price of 17 millions they have finally offered me taking into consideration the value of the property and the alternative options available to the buyer along with alternative options available to us in the present situation. You must known the zone of possible agreement is known as ZOPA. In this situation the zone may be that of around 16.5 Millions which the reservation price is for we have.  In the given situation the best strategy would be let the other party about the value of the property in that reason which we known and sell the property at 17 million.

References

Carbonneau, R.A. and Vahidov, R.M., 2014. A utility concession curve data fitting model for quantitative analysis of negotiation styles. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(9), pp.4035-4042.

Coburn, C., 2015. Negotiation conflict styles. Boston: Harvard Medical School Ombuds.

Dell’Aquila, E., Marocco, D., Ponticorvo, M., Di Ferdinando, A., Schembri, M. and Miglino, O., 2017. ENACT: virtual experiences of negotiation. In Educational Games for Soft-Skills Training in Digital Environments (pp. 89-103). Springer, Cham.

Elfenbein, H.A., 2015. Individual differences in negotiation: A nearly abandoned pursuit revived. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(2), pp.131-136.

Mahmoud, M.A., Ahmad, M.S., Yusoff, M.Z.M. and Idrus, A., 2015. Automated multi-agent negotiation framework for the construction domain. In Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, 12th International Conference (pp. 203-210). Springer, Cham.

McFadden, D., 2014. Culture, Business Negotiation and Mediation: Understanding Cultural Differences, Communication Styles and Finding Mutual Understanding. Asian Dispute Review, 16(3), pp.132-136.

Neuliep, J.W. and Johnson, M., 2016. A cross-cultural comparison of Ecuadorian and United States face, facework, and conflict styles during interpersonal conflict: An application of face-negotiation theory. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 9(1), pp.1-19.

Pacella, D., Dell’Aquila, E., Marocco, D. and Furnell, S., 2017, August. Toward an Automatic Classification of Negotiation Styles using Natural Language Processing. In International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (pp. 339-342). Springer, Cham.

Pinkley, R.L., Conlon, D.E., Sawyer, J.E., Sleesman, D.J., Vandewalle, D. and Kuenzi, M., 2017. Unpacking BATNA Availability: How Probability Can Impact Power in Negotiation. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2017, No. 1, p. 16888). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.

Rahim, M.A., 2017. Managing conflict in organizations. Routledge.

Su, H.C., Chen, Y.S. and Ro, Y.K., 2017. Perception differences between buyer and supplier: the effect of agent negotiation styles. International Journal of Production Research, 55(20), pp.6067-6083.

Ting?Toomey, S., 2015. Identity negotiation theory. The international encyclopedia of interpersonal communication.

Tu, Y.T., 2014. Cross-cultural equivalence and latent mean differences of the Negotiation Style Profile (NSP-12) in Taiwan and US managers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43, pp.156-164.

Tu, Y.T., 2015. A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC) on Negotiation Styles. The Anthropologist, 19(2), pp.457-467.

Zarei, A., Hassannejad, M. and Ganjouei, F.A., 2016. Explaining the role of negotiation skills in conflict management among physical education experts. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS)? ISSN 2356-5926, pp.1893-1903.