The session on Negotiation was the most interesting so far.

It is something that as

rational human beings, we are supposed to do almost on a daily basis. Playing the role

of the Professor, I was able to convey my interests, find a common ground with the

company’s and strike a deal eventually within the prescribed limit that both parties can

do with. As one of the Executive Members of my college’s fest, I had to negotiate for

bedding arrangements with a contractor. We had invited bids, and one bidder had

quoted a lower amount than our long-term vendor. Traditionally, we had always offered

the tender to the lowest bidder, but this time, I met both of them individually. I got to

know that the new bidder had lower quality beddings and was infamous for some thefts

at other places. I didn’t let price bulldoze other interests like security and comfort –

denying any of which would have a snowball effect for our fest. We accommodated our

traditional bidder’s interests who had actually quoted more because of increase in raw

material prices.

I have always been a demanding person and often hit deadlocks while negotiating because I fail to

gauge the position of the other side. I was very excited to see how I would fare in the exercise on

negotiation especially when the other party is going to be one of my friends.

The negotiation exercise put me in the shoes of Dr. Nathan. Assessing that my best alternative to the

negotiated agreement (BATNA) could lead to loss of lives, I tried to get all the 3000 melons from Dr.

Chitnis by projecting the gravity of my need. Initially, both sides tried to postpone the need of the
other

and were not willing to budge from their demands. Looking back, I feel that I had a preconceived

notion that Dr. Chitnis had a conflict of interest and hence, I was selective in disclosing key

information. This lack of trust and competing negotiation style was what led us to this deadlock.

I applied my learnings from the reading on ‘Effective Negotiators’ to find a common ground with Dr.

Chitnis. By disclosing my position, I was able to establish a level of trust which was reciprocated by

Dr. Chitnis. When both of us realized that our requirements were complementary (peels vs. juice),
we

both were able to procure enough melons for our organizations.

This exercise and the associated reading made me realize the errors I had made in the past while

negotiating. At my previous organization (iRunway), I had to occasionally negotiate for delivery

timelines with my manager. I was often critical of the crunch deadlines and the tight budgets I felt
my
manager was ‘imposing’ on me. As I relate my experiences to this case, I feel that I neglected the fact

that my manager had to ensure timely delivery of the project while ensuring cost-effectiveness. This

narrow vision often made me feel that my considerations have not been taken into account which

affected my efficiency at work. I believe that had I realized the needs of the organization and that of

the client, I could have negotiated better and delivered more effectively.

The key takeaways for me from this exercise are that I should approach a negotiation with a blank

slate and adequate homework. If I can shed the notion that requirements of the two negotiating

parties are mirror image of each other, I can be successful in closing negotiations. Often, I have failed

to listen and comprehend the position of others in a group scenario. By pulling rank, I have gained at

the expense of others. This focus of mine on the economic contract, while neglecting the social

aspect of such negotiations has often ended up in alienation of my peers. As a future manager, I

realize that it is crucial for me to listen to the other party and understand their position. If I can work

with others to find a common ground and consolidate our agendas, I can work more effectively with

others and maintain better relationships.