Another 'nuff said moment

Once again, your humble blogger came across something to good not to repos:

That's it. That's the post.

Blessings.

Book Review: Getting to Yes

With Interest: A Review of Getting to Yes

            Everyone negotiates in some form or fashion in their everyday life.  In reading Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and William Ury, the authors address the subject from a perspective that may seem foreign to many.  Introducing the concept of principled negotiation, the authors approach negotiations in a no-frills manner that describes a process that goes beyond skin deep.  This especially illustrated in their concept of focusing on interests instead of positions. It is an approach, as will be described in this paper as one that produces results.

            Reading as a how-to guide, Fisher and Ury give practical advice to resolving conflicts.  Promoting the idea of principled negotiation, they define a process as one that determines issues based on their merits (Fisher and Ury, 1981, p. xvii). It assumes a goal of achieving results agreed on by both sides that are mutually satisfactory (p. 14).  Of the factors that go into the process, the clear standout is the idea of emphasizing interests.

            The obvious question at this point is most likely “Why care about interests? Isn’t negotiating about getting what you want in the first place?”  According to the authors, “positional bargaining becomes a contest of the will” (p. 6). It’s a situation where those involved get entrenched in their sides and attempt to get the other to back down (p.6).  They further note that in such a situation it is difficult to come to reconciliation (p. 5).

            Most people have seen enough court shows to know that most aren’t there for the money, but “the principal”. Or, in the case of the all-too-familiar high profile divorce, one side (usually the wife) argues for alimony in order to “maintain the lifestyle enjoyed during the marriage” As the authors contend, the primary issue in negotiating isn’t about positions, but interests (p. 40).  Given this, they argue for focusing on interests in order to achieve resolution (p. 41).  Going back to the aforementioned court shows, many have ended in one side getting something of value comparable to the amount money they were being argued for.  The authors go further in making their argument, however, by delving into the reason this technique works.

            In explaining the usefulness of focusing on interests, Fisher and Ury explore the concept of shared and conflicting interests as being hidden under differing positions.  They argue that looking at these issues will lead one to find more similarities than differences (p. 42).  Even if there are differences in interests, they argue, resolution is possible (p. 43).  With this in mind, the conversation moves to how to identify interests.

            Fisher and Ury solve this conundrum by beginning with asking the questions “Why” and “Why Not?” (p. 44).   The first question requires a negotiator to analyze the other side’s position and look at the reasoning behind that position, focusing specifically on understanding the desires, hopes, fears, or needs that it addresses (p. 44).  The second requires a negotiator to look at the other side’s state of mind by asking themselves why the other side didn’t take the position they felt the aforementioned negotiator would take (p. 44).  These are techniques that are more than applicable to the real world.

            In contentious situations, many try to “get in the head” of their opponents.  Given this, it would be logical to attempt to understand the reasoning for a opponent’s particular position.  In this regard, Fisher and Ury makes a strong case. Nevertheless, they delve into the subject even deeper.

            The authors further contend that each side in a negotiation has varying interests, therefore making this fact necessary information for negotiators (p. 47).   Such realizations, they argue, enables both individual and shared interests to be pursued by both parties involved in the process.  In analyzing this point, its value becomes self-evident. Like the layers of an onion, Fisher and Ury attempt to peel away to the core of the negotiating process-basic human needs.

            Earlier in the book, the two promote the idea of negotiators are, first and foremost, people (p. 18).  With this, there are basic needs people desire to be met, such as security, belonging, and financial stability (p. 50).  However, as Dale Carnegie (1936, p. 18) notes, there is an even deeper human need that is “gnawing and unfaltering”-the need to be important.  Simple yet elusive, Fisher and Ury in no uncertain terms define this fundamental concept of negotiating.   With everything in mind, the book next takes the reader to the following step-communicating interests.

            Common knowledge dictates communication as a necessity for negotiating.  As the saying goes, “closed mouths don’t get fed”.  At the same time, bad communication has been proven time immemorial to be a deal-breaker. Fisher and Ury describe various methods for one to express their interests when negotiating-making the interests come alive, acknowledging the other side’s interest as part of the problem, putting the problem before the answer,  look forward, not back, and be simultaneously concrete and flexible (pp. 50-53). 

            In describing the first method, the book reasons for using details when talking about interests during negotiations (p. 50).  This has become an increasingly significant part of social interaction that almost every reality TV show today has a segment where contestants make their cases for why they should continue.  As the authors note negotiators should let the other side know that their issues “legitimately demands attention” (p. 51). Going back to the aforementioned Carnegie, the following phrase sums this technique best:

This is the day of dramatization.  Merely stating a truth isn’t enough.  The truth has to be made vivid, interesting, dramatic.  You have to use showmanship. (Carnegie, p. 191)

Not to downplay the opposing side, the book further makes arguments for affirming that side’s interests as part of the problem.

            In light of aforementioned basic human need for being important, Fisher and Ury again illustrate the everyday usefulness of this method in negotiating.  As they note “People listen better if they feel that you have understood them” (p. 51). Not only this, they also tie this concept with the aforementioned focus on shared interests (p. 51).  Without mutual understanding, then, no mutual agreement can be achieved.  In order to do this, the authors maintain, both parties should set their aims toward the future.

            Again connecting this concept with the previous concept of asking “why”, the book notes that the question “looks forward for a purpose” (p. 51). As the saying goes, “It’s not where you come from, but where you’re going”.  Hence, coming to an agreement means reaching consensus on a future solution.  It is easy to move forward when there are no obstacles coming from behind.  With this in consideration, Fisher and Ury take their focus on interests to the negotiating table

            When the time comes to make a deal, the authors maintain the importance of keeping options concrete yet flexible (p. 51).  These options, they note, should be in line with the negotiator’s interest (p. 51).  As the book states, “The purpose of negotiating is to serve your interests” (p. 50).  Simply stated, it is a pure description of everyday life.

            Bringing the point home, Fisher and Ury address a significant aspect on focusing on interests-attacking the problem without attacking people.   This succinctly brings all the areas of the concept of interests together.  When a negotiator creates interest on the part of the opposition in the underlying issues involved in the conflict, they are directly addressing the problem while focusing less on who’s involved.  That frees up room to create mutual understanding.  Hence, there is room for consensus.

            The concepts of Getting to Yes are presented in a concise and readable manner.  Each example is taken from an everyday situation, making it relatable for the readable.  It is in this that the book has its potency.  As each point delicately intertwines with another, the advice it gives becomes all the more relevant and useful. 

            In many negotiation scenarios, it is difficult to focus on anything other than success.  In their book, Roger Fisher and William Ury illustrate the concept of focusing on interests in such circumstances.  By explaining the why and how of this aspect of negotiating, Getting to Yes gives the reader gets a no-holds-barred picture of the fundamentals of their “principled negotiation” style.  It is a style, tested by time and common knowledge that offers satisfying results for all parties involved..

           

             

           

References

Carnegie, D. (1936).  How to Win Friends & Influence People. New York: Pocket Books.

Fisher, R. and Ury, W (1981).  Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.  New York: Penguin Books.

Humanity, a poem

(Inspired by a recent JM tweet)

The Good, the Beautiful,  and True
Dwell in me and you
Let's pour each other Their graces
That flow forever new.
Feeling desirous for a beautiful future.

Fashion mood-Put it Over a Turtleneck Part Deux

Your humble blogger is at it again- this time for the warmer weather. Again,  it's all in the accessorizing, color combos and silhouettes that make it pop.


Until next time!

Fashion mood: Put it over a turtleneck

Knowing how to layer clothing is not an option for a person a mostly relying on public transportation living in Detroit. It's just not. With that in mind, your humble blogger decided to try something different and try looks putting some warmer weather pieces over turtlenecks

What started with putting together the Chanel Paris Fashion week inspired look for the last blog post turned into "What would this piece look like over a turtleneck?". Then came Uniqlo's impeccably styled lookbook for its Hana Tajima collaboration. Months of cold weather can make one anxious to layer up in new ways, especially if it can mean incorporating items that point to better weather to come.

All in all, layering a Spring (or Summer) piece over can be a way to put some pizazz to your look at a time when the weather can be (and often is) really iffy. All you need are the right accessories, a little play with lines, and you're good to go.

Runway to Real-Way, Janelle Monàe Paris Fashion Week edition

So your humble blogger decided to dig in her closet and play dress up.  The inspiration? A certain someone with the initials JM at Paris Fashion Week.  Of all the incredible looks Ms. Monàe gave us at this event,  the following two were practically begging to be reproduced for an everyday concoction.

(Source: refinery29.com)

(Photo: courtesy of Rana Irby)

Jacket: Flo Boutique 

Purse: Zarkpa's

This one may be easy to reproduce , but shouts to Zarkpa's for selling cool purses, like this black,  white,  and red striped one to set everything off 

Speaking of setting off, let's talk about this ensemble Jane worked at the Chanel fashion show:

(Source: footwearnews.com)

Straight.  Up.  Elegance.

The silhouette and colors of this, though,  made me automatically think of putting this together for something more everyday:

(Photo: courtesy of  Rana Irby)

Top: Zarkpa's

Skirt: Catherine Catherine Malandrino 

Shoes: Rebecca Minkoff 

Gotta love inspiration.

Featured:

Zarkpa's: www.zarkpas.com

Flo Boutique: @floboutique (Instagram)

Catherine Catherine Malandrino: nordstromrack.com

Rebecca Minkoff: rebeccaminkoff.com

Love is in the Air

It's that time of year again! As we celebrate the big L word, let us consider a definition that doesn't seem to be commonplace in wider society but worth reiterating: willing the good of another. May we find ways to give love in this way to all who come in our path, no matter who they are. 

Blessings, 

MsRanaDee