Negotiations Although Not an Actual

Negotiations Although not an actual Batmobile, my son's 1964 Plymouth Fury nevertheless has some salient selling features which I hoped to convey to potential buyers. The Fury may not be able to fly or perform any remotely fancy functions, but my son had diligently rebuilt the engine to mint condition and the car drives wonderfully. Even if the car is not a collector's item, at least its buyer will be satisfied with a purchase that will be far less expensive than other used cars on the market.

Moreover, the car retains some degree of panache as a vintage automobile, and in spite of its cosmetic flaws has an aesthetic appeal. Only one buyer appeared genuinely interested: my partner in the simulation. Our process of negotiation proceeded much as a typical by-owner sale would. We compromised on the price. I, the owner, asked for $500 and my partner, the buyer, offered $300 in keeping with the offer by the salvage company. Settling on $400 represented a bland compromise that did not involve true collaboration because of the nature of the deal.

The simulation revealed several potential weaknesses in the negotiation process and revealed how surprisingly challenging a seemingly simple negotiation can become. Before entering into negotiations in earnest, I should have refused to grow deterred by the lack of demand for the Plymouth Fury. Without an official market valuation of the automobile, such as through the Hemings listing, I floundered throughout the negotiations procedure. Essentially I based the automobile's value on the salvage operator's offer of $300.

My undervaluing the car stemmed directly from my fears that I would be lucky to get a penny more than $300. As a motivated seller, I started my bargaining too low and assumed the car was worth much less than it actually was, at least to my son and me. The Best Alternative to Negotiation Agreement (BATNA) might have been $300, but a more skilled negotiator would have dismissed such as low BATNA price and confidently assumed the challenge of acquiring a more reasonable sum for the car.

Another surprising feature of our negotiations was the lack of back-and-forth collaboration and dialogue. In short, we did not engage in integrative bargaining or dynamic negotiation. I simply spat out my asking price based on what I had expected to receive based on the BATNA. Forgetting the condition of the engine and the other possible features my partner valued when he did spend time looking under the hood, I failed to probe my partner for his needs.

I should have asked, for example, what he wanted to use the car for, if he has owned a similar automobile, and whether or not he was a collector. Had I gleaned some extra information about my partner, the two of us could have worked harder on "creating" value than on "claiming value." As the case progressed I realized that I had succeeded at neither. The brevity and lackluster nature of the negotiations was one of the most frustrating and surprising features of the simulation.

I learned that the successful negotiator engages the partner in dialogue to create value and stimulate interest in the item at hand. Using a more integrative.