YouTube Transcript:
Гарвардский метод переговоров. Лекция 1. Деловые переговоры

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

Video Transcript

Available languages:

View:

Harvard method of negotiation

Harvard method of negotiation was developed by

was developed by

famous consultants on conducting

negotiations Roger Fisher

William Ury and Breus

Patly this method they presented their books

Negotiations without defeat Harvard

method the most common form of

negotiations depends on the successive

occupation and surrender of a number of positions when the

participants in negotiations take

certain positions they find themselves

locked in them the more precisely you clarify

your position and the more clearly you defend it from the

attacks of the other side, the more firmly and and

defend the more actively you try to

convince the other side of the impossibility of

changing your position, the more difficult it

becomes for you to do and in fact yours

merges with your position you have a

new interest you need to

save face coordinate your future

actions with the positions taken in the past and

this significantly reduces the likelihood of

achieving a

reasonable agreement that meets the interests of

both parties excessively firm

defense of their positions turns into a

struggle of egos people recognize two

ways of conducting negotiations delicate and

tough choosing the first method a person

tries with all his might to avoid personal

conflicts and makes concessions in order to

achieve agree he wants to reach a

solution that would suit both

parties but as a result feels a

deceived person who has chosen a tough

negotiating style views

any emerging situation as a conflict of

egos in which

only the one who insists on his own can win he wants to

win but more often than not he runs into an even

tougher position this is exhausting

drains strength and resources spoils relations not

not

yes between the participants these are the so-called

positional negotiations they have too

many shortcomings there is a

third method combining the

features of the 2 previous one is the method of

principled negotiations

developed within the framework of the Harvard

negotiation project

this method takes into account the true interests of

both parties

they are reduced to a meaningless discussion of what

each of the participants is ready to do

and what they will not do under any circumstances the main

premise of the method is that the

participants strive with all their might to find a

mutually beneficial solution

and when a conflict of interests arises the

solution must be based on

fair standards independent of the

desires of the parties the

method of principled negotiations is tough

in relation to the issues being decided but

delicate towards people let's consider in more detail

positional and principled negotiations

most negotiations are held as

positional sentences when each of the

parties voices its position and

argues why its position is correct

example positional negotiations I believe

that the fair rent for my

apartment is 30 thousand rubles per month the

owners of the apartment voiced their position what are

you saying the rent for

your apartment is 20,000 rubles per month the

potential tenant also voiced

his position and then each party

begins to argue why its

position is more adequate

correct fair why the opponent's position is

inadequate incorrect unfair in order to

agree the parties are forced to make

concessions to each other changing their position

sometimes this allows you to reach an agreement

sometimes not disadvantages of positional

negotiations they are quite tough

because after announcing your positions there

is a desire to

firmly defend even if inside you

understand that you are not very good crossings

as a result negotiations are

longer with elements of deception and

manipulation they often spoil relationships

because when defending your position you are

forced to attack the position of your

negotiating partner which does not contribute to maintaining

maintaining

good relations as a result dissatisfaction with the

results of negotiations an agreement even

if it is reached often causes

dissatisfaction among both parties because they

were forced to abandon their

original position which they considered

adequate and fair in order to reach an agreement with the party in contrast to

positional negotiations principled

negotiations offer to concentrate

on the following principles now we will

consider them and so the basic task create a

constructive atmosphere for negotiations

take into account the human factor

technologies for resolving the conflict such

use three strategies for finding a

possible agreement through

satisfying interests

concentrate on interests they are on the

position through

objective criteria or principles

insist on using objective

criteria and third through comparing

options look study offer

different options

choose the most optimal one

talk in more detail about each of the

principles the good old truth says

most negotiations reach a dead end

dead end

because the relationship

between the negotiators did not work out that is between people

people

strives for warm friendly relations it is

not necessary this is not necessary besides it is not

always possible it is enough for the

relationship to be given the opportunity to calmly

jointly resolve the negotiation situation

what can help to establish business constructive

constructive

solutions try to understand the picture of the world of the

negotiating partner for you a

hamburger is a hamburger and yes as food in the

picture of the world of another person it can

be the murder of a living being and the one who

eats hamburgers for him is a murderer in the

picture of the world 3

it can be the murder of a sacred

animal deity with all the ensuing

consequences differences in pictures of the world

can give rise to strong and not understanding the

motives of the negotiating partner's actions

they understanding will lead to strengthening they

smoothing out the conflict do not blame the

other party accusations force the

opponent to defend himself no one wants to

feel guilty therefore by

accusing someone you will most likely cause the

other party to make counter accusations against you

you

develop a solution together they

offer your ready-made solutions

I thought about it without you and came up with a good

solution to the conflict even if you came up with

something good you will most likely run into an

objection therefore ideally you need to

create a feeling in your partner that it was he who

came to this decision that it was he who

came up with it formulate your thoughts politically correctly

politically correctly

help save the face of your

negotiating partner a person may be glad to make

concessions but if this is associated with a

loss of face

then he will defend himself to the last

therefore it is important to be as diplomatic as possible

correctly conduct negotiations and

formulate the proposed solution

so as not to hurt the self-esteem of the negotiating parties the

following control emotions if

necessary give your negotiating partner the opportunity to let off

steam by splashing out

emotions he may then begin to behave

more calmly compared to the

situation when emotions are recorded

inside him and burst out do not

react to the emotional outbursts of

others it is natural to respond to an emotional blow with an

emotional blow, but

self-control in this situation will be more useful

useful

listen actively let your partner know

that you hear and understand him

repeat key words

then paraphrase clarify details

if your opponent gets the

feeling that you are not listening and not

hearing him then this is unlikely to

contribute to good relations and

also establishing good relations is

largely an

element of art they are technology sometimes

just a smile or a well-timed compliment

compliment

turns out to be that very magic

element that establishes constructive communication it is

communication it is

necessary to learn this art you need to

try to negotiate softly

so that both you and the subscribers feel

comfortable in a joint search for a solution to the

conflict in order to find a solution to the conflict that

suits both parties the

Harvard method recommends

using three key strategies

concentrate on interests they are in

positions here is the first strategy an example let's

consider from the book negotiations without

defeats two people are sitting in a library

one wants to open a window the other

prefers that it remain

closed they begin to argue about

how much they can open the window make a

small crack open it halfway and

three-quarters not open it at all neither

solution satisfies the disputant enters the library

library

he asks one of the disputants why

he wants to open the window so that there

is fresh air in the room then he asks the

other why he does not want to open the

window so that there is no draft after thinking for

a minute the librarian opens the window in the

next room thus the

room becomes fresh but at the same

time there is no draft positions

positions

rice to open the window or

leave it open and interests were

reduced to fresh air and the absence of a draft

draft

thus positions and interests are

different things more important interests arguing at the

level of positions it is difficult to find a solution

sometimes impossible when moving to the level of

level of

interests the solution is often found easily

and quickly but also not always

since this technique is not a panacea another

example from the book negotiations without defeats

after the six-day war of 1967

israel occupied the sinai peninsula

belonging to egypt in 1978 egypt

israel sat down at the negotiating table to

make peace their positions at that time

seemed insoluble israel insisted

on keeping sinai for itself egypt from

its country demanded the full

return of the territory of the sinai

peninsula an analysis of genuine interests

revealed that israel's interests lay in security the

security the

Israelis simply did not want

Egyptian tanks to be stationed right on their

border ready to enter the battle at any moment

and Egypt was interested in keeping

those lands that had been part of the state since the time of the pharaohs

pharaohs

and the territories as a result they

developed a plan according to which the Sinai

Peninsula was returned to Egypt but Egypt

took on the obligation not to station

its military forces on it thus

Israel got what it wanted

security Egyptian tanks were

several hundred kilometers from their border and

Egypt also got what it

wanted to preserve the territorial

also find out the interests of the other side

if the position is usually presented

clearly specifically openly and that and the interests are

often not clear veiled concealed and unconscious

unconscious

to clarify the interests of the other side you

can use the following techniques

first ask if there is a good relationship you

can ask directly and openly why it is

important to you why you insist on it

for what you would like to

get it for what is important for yourself you

expect to get under these conditions

and often you get information about the other

side and in its interests that are

hidden behind the position second take the

position of the other side because sometimes it is

difficult to ask but psychologically flexible a

person can easily imagine himself in the

position of another person and think

if I were my opponent in

negotiations I would insist on these conditions then what is the

reason that I do this what

interests push me to do this

and such putting yourself in the place of another

person sometimes helps to see the world through the

eyes of a negotiating partner and a little

better understand his motives for behavior

3 try to guess while asking the

question do I understand correctly that you

insist on this position because it is

important for you and so on if you guessed right

then good the partner gets

the feeling that you understand him that you are

sincerely interested in what is important for him

if you did not guess also not very

scary often in response it does not sound quite like that

I insist on this position

because it is important for me and here he reveals

his interest and the truth and fourthly

tell about your interests

yourself often there is no problem in

openly telling the

other side your interests that are

hidden behind your position this can

push opponents to the fact that they in

response and also move on to sincerely

disclosing their own interests

or at least the opponent thinks about

finding solutions that correspond to

your interests when you identify the

interests of your partner in negotiations and

understand your interests, it will be easier for you to come

up with a solution

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube Transcript:Гарвардский метод переговоров. Лекция 1. Деловые переговоры

Video Transcript

Paste YouTube URL

Transcript Extraction Form

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube Transcript:
Гарвардский метод переговоров. Лекция 1. Деловые переговоры