2. What is the function of the
 wavy line in the middle? 

3. What is the difference 
 between positions and interests?

2. The line represents the water. like an iceberg, the positions are above the line and the interests are below. Positions are usually more clearly visible than the interests hidden behind them. With icebergs, you cannot see directly what is hidden under the surface of the water. the boundary between position and interest is not clear to draw therefore the wavy line.-- bas sentence

3. Interests can contain consist of wishes, fears, concerns or worries. It is quasi Interests are the reasons which that lead to a superficial position. The question is: Why someone wants something. Positions of two people are usually different but interests often correspond. Very good

 

2.       The wavy line divides the positions from the interests. Since the positions should be disregarded in a negotiation and are not relevant, they are separated from the important interests. mmmjjaa, positions are important, but we need to find the interests to find possible solutions

 

3.       The difference between positions and interests is that positions illustrate the position 2 x position, use opinion or proposal of the respective party. It merely shows what the party wants and what it does not want. However, it is not possible to work out solutions with the other party. Behind the positions there are always interests of the respective parties. These are decisive for a negotiation, because with them it is possible to find out why one has taken a position and what the underlying interests are.

Very good

2. The wavy line corresponds to water. Everything above the line is visible and everything below the line is not immediately visible.

3. The positions can be recognised quickly or even immediately. The interests must be found out. Ditto

2. The wave line separates positions from interests. Below the wavy line the interests are shown are hard to see,  because they are below the water. Positions are above the wavy line, because they are at the surface.

3. The wavy line in the middle refers to the difference between positions and interests. Positions are usually clearly visible, while interests first have to be explored.
Good

2. I think that the wavy line in the middle shows the line, until where we show our interests. Because the interests weren’t showed or communicated a lot. So that maybe will be the line which define how much interests we disclose.

3. Position is what we want.

Interests Is why we want it. (MV: 1 and 2 not good, see other answers, 3 very good)

2.      People often discuss with each other on the basis of positions. The interests are not taken into account. The line represents this border. It is necessary to "dive deeper" to find the actual source of the conflict.

3.      A position is a specific demand which doesn’t provide any insight into an underlying motivation or problem. Interests are the deeper, more general wishes and emotions from which positions emerge.

Very good, see some other ones for additional points, e.g., it is important to explore interests

 

 

2. The wavy line in the middle shows the separation between positions and interests. But it also shows that the definition of positions and interests cannot always be interpreted in the same way and that these can sometimes run into each other.

 

 

3. Positions represent opinions that are concrete and clearly formulated. The interests are the backgrounds or needs that lead to the formed opinion.
Very good, see some other answers for additional points

2.       The line in the middle shows us a separation between the position that you can see or hear in a negotiation and the interests that you can’t see or know in the first point. and that you need to discover, e.g., with open or reflective questions, through asking for feedback on your position, etc. 

3.       The interests are something that a negotiation want to achieve an the position is the way how they want to achieve the interests. Not eintirely correct. See other answers

2. What might stop you from listening? 

3. How can you ensure that you listen effectively to others and
 others listen effectively to you?

The partner certainly appreciates it if you listen well and is more willing to compromise. Great

 

2.  A phone call or a message can be distracting. We have to make sure that the phone is put aside or at least set to silent.  

the meeting should take place in a separate room so that other colleagues can’t interrupt the negotiation. Important: you go into negotiations only focused on what YOU want to say, with pre-formed opinions, so you don not listen to the other side

 

3. You can ask: do I understand you correctly…? And repeat what you understood in your words. 

After you have presented your point of view you can ask if there are any questions

 

2.       If you already have your own solutions in mind and only think about them, this could distract you from listening attentively. If you are not solution-oriented and do not want to leave your point of view, you will not listen either. Great

 

3.       In which one listens attentively, lets the counterpart speak out and asks many questions for understanding. One must understand the opposite and find out the interests, only then one comes to a solution. Likewise one should give the opposite the feeling to be interested in the discussion. Great

2. When you are not concentrated or focused enough. When the person opposite only tells you about himself or herself and it could become boring or repetitive at some point.

3. If you summarise the most important points again and then ask the person opposite if this is true? Have I understood that correctly. Or when you ask the person opposite to look to see if they have understood.
1 & 2 Interesting, but not always correct, see other answers. 3 good

·         You could state out more explain better, what you really want and why this could fit to the interests of the other party

2.  An already planned position of my one own

·         My on own thinking’s – I already think further or what I am going to respond

3. I could listen better if I am going to ask in between if I got something wright right - use correction mode of MS Word or pose deeper questions

·         I could make some notes (bullet points) and turn of off other distractions like the mobile phone
Answers good, see others' as well

2. - Because of my own points of view, which I would like to put in the foreground

-  if the negotiating partner does not get to the point

-  if the negotiating partner gives no reasonI 

3. listen to others:

-          avoid distractions during the negotiation

-          ask questions if anything is unclear

 Others listen to me:

-          keep eye contact

-          ask the negotiating partner a concrete question, request feedback

Good answers, many different points

-          Thanks to the information’s exact questions about uncleared points can be asked. Unclear sentence

-          An interesting surrounding haha good answer, but not what is meant here

-          When you think that your opponent just talks about nonsense and you are totally not agreeing with her/him his opinion.

-          Make have short breaks to interrupt the meeting – let in fresh air and drink some coffee or a tea.

-          After 10-15 minutes of speaking time ask questions if all is clear and they agree with you.
Imaginative answers, check other answers for better ones

2.2. I insist on my positions and focus on my thoughts prepared before the conversation.

2.3. A Chinese proverb says: You have two eyes, two ears and one mouth. Use the resources accordingly. 

Accordingly, you should listen and watch more than speak. In addition, you can occasionally ask counter-questions or make summaries in the sense of, if I understood that correctly....
Great answers

2.       There are different things who that can stop you from listening. Emotions and disagreement are probably the main reasons. However, during a presentation a bad PowerPoint-Presentation could be another reason. If there is too much information on a slide, participants tend to read and stop listening to listen. Haha, you mean my PPTs? 

3.       Do some notes. This helps you to think about what the others just said.  Moreover, you could ask some comprehension questions.
1 & 2, see other answers, 3 good

2. - You’re thinking about what you’re going to say.
 - You’ve decided that the speaker isn’t worth listening to.
 - You’ve decided that you know what the speaker is going to say.
 - You’ve decided that you disagree with the speaker.

3. I need to keep an open mind and need to clarify what I don’t understand.
 If I want others to listen carefully to me I need to check for comprehension, pause to give the people time to ask questions and to allow comments

Very good, many points noted down

2.      Monotonous voice, speaker does not engage with the listener and does not ask clarification questions. Involving the listener makes them listen and also helps them to listen actively. 

3.      No interruption, use facial expressions and body language, use easy understandable language, ask questions.

Good, see other answers for 2 & 3

·         The opposite side or opponent feels taken seriously.

·         Perhaps the other party also respects my interests and we can reach an agreement more quickly

2. If he or she doesn’t disclose the reasons for his position.

·         When he or she always talks about the same thing.

·         If he or she doesn’t get to the point

·         If I am not interested in the topic
Interesting, but see other answers

3. To listen effectively to others:

·         Avoid distractions

·         inquire if I have not understood something

·         I repeat in my own words what I have understood

 

Others listen effectively to me:

·         Keep eye contact

·         I speak to you directly

·         I ask concrete questions at the negotiating partner

·         Formulate clear and understandable sentences

good, look for additions on answers of others

2.       If you are focused on your own interests and showing to show your position well you can’t listen very well what your partner is telling you. Again, this is most important, very good

3.       You can ask question or repeat what the other person just said or you sum up the conversation at the end. good, see also some other answers to this Q

a. Why does Karen get so frustrated?

b. How could Karen ensure that Levien really understand what is on the table?

Video 2:

c. What do you notice about Françoise’s participation?

d. How does Karen manage the session?

B) Karen should say, that she will answer the questions after her short presentation of her point of view. Karen could draw a model or write down a few keywords so that it can also be experienced visually.

 
C) She listened better, asked some questions but did not interrupt constantly. And she was more polite. 

D) Karen guided more structured through the negotiation, step by step.

As well as in addition, she showed details in a document so Andrew and Francoise could better follow her point of view. Karen was more patient than in the first video and answered the questions in detail.
Very good answers

b. She needs to be more assertive in handling the interruptions. She should keep her objective in mind while maintaining a positive tone. 

c. Françoise listens actively. She shows that she understands and interprets Karen’s explanation. She helps the communication to be successful. 

d. Karen takes command when Sean asks a question she is not ready for. In this way, she achieves her objective of clarifying the pricing structure. Andrew and Karen work as a team, which further supports the positive communication. 

 

b)      Karen would have to raise some questions of understanding. She could ask Levin's Levien 's people if they understood everything or specifically ask for certain facts. See answer at the top

 

c)       Francoise seems to have some difficulty in understanding. She takes part in the conversation but does not listen well. Karen has to repeat herself often. See top 

 

d)      Karen repeats herself very often and seems a bit tense because she is annoyed because she always has to repeat everything.
You seem to think that everything went wrong, also in video 2. In this one, there are potential conflicts but these are handled much better than in video 1. See top answers

b. Karen could ensure it if she could ask Sean and Francoise questions.

c. Francoise asked Karen interested questions. But she didn't interrupt Karen, she always waited for Karen to finish her story.

d. Karen led the meeting and answered questions from Sean and Francoise. She did well because she remained very calm and spoke clearly.
Good answers, see for additional points the top answers above

b She could explain the whole thing on an easier level and show them the named pages directly to make it more understandable.

See top answers above, right under the questions

b.  Karen must once again summarize and explain the most important points of the proposal. Then answer questions from Sean and Francoise. In addition, Karen have has to answer the questions to the end despite the interruption. Incomprehensible sentence

c.       Francois no longer interrupts Karen, but actively asks questions on the issues where there are still uncertainties.

d.      Karen is not really managing the meeting. She is just answering questions from Francoise and Andrew.

Good, but not entirely complete,  see top answers

b.       No – they can’t explain all the details because she gets interrupted.
c.       Francoise is friendly and asks questions if she don’t understand what the purpose exactly means. is And this without interrupting Karen's explications.

d.       How does Karen manage the session?

In a calm manner – she always finishes her topic and then goes to the next or then she answers to the questions the other party had. Grammar: Mixing present and past in same sentence is not good. "she answers... party has" OR "she answered ... party had".
Pay attention to he/she & verb --> verb ends with 's'  --> I write, you write, he/she/it writeS.
Answers: good, but check for many extra answers that are more on point

b. It could encourage the discussion participants to prepare the conversation in advance and to think about it. She can then stick to her proposed structure in the conversation and ask the participants at each point whether it has been understood.

c. He was more prepared, or rather he listened to her. Francoise is the older blond woman, French accent, hahaha, so not a he.

d. Much better. We are practicing writing as well, so write full sentences. She responds to the interlocutors and keeps to the structure.
OK answers, check for additional points that one can make on these Qs

B) She could try to handle the interruptions better and to keep a positive tone.

 C) She listens actively and and tries to help for a good ensure good / ease / enable good communication. She shows understanding for what is said by Karen.

D) She handles the meeting in a good way so that she can explain the pricing structure.

Very good, see a few extra points in the answer at the top

 

b.      Ask them questions to ensure they understand everything and when everything is clear for Levien, they can move to the next point. 

 

c.       He takes the lead and asks the questions. Francoise is a woman, hahaha, the blonde, French accent, so who is he in your answer?

 

d.      Ask them questions to ensure they understand everything and when everything is clear for Levien, they can move to the next point.

Good answers, see top answer for some more points

·         Karen is interrupted again and again.

·         Sean and Françoise didn’t read through the price offer and therefore didn’t prepare for the meeting.

 

 B)  

·         By summarizing the main points of the proposal

·         By answering the questions completely, despite interruption

 
C)  

She doesn’t pose clear and short questions, but rather responds to the conversation with Karen.

 

 d.       

She clears up misunderstandings before she answers the next question.

Very good, see also top answer

 

 

b. She has to handle deal with (handle something or deal with something) the interruptions. She shouldn’t get frustrated that fast. It’s better when she is openminded and tries to structure the meeting. It is better to be/stay open-minded and try to...

c. She asks asked the right questions and waited till Karen could give an answer Full stop, start new sentence. and then she asked the next question. She listened to Karen and what she is was talking about. You mix past and present, and connect too many sentences by using 'and' all the time

d. In the second part she could manage the situation better than in the first one. She had the options to tell about could talk about / had the possibility to talk about,... the points and  answer  the questions. In part two you could see that Karen and Andrew are a team and they work together. In the first video Andrew wasn’t really interested in the meeting.
Good answers, see top for additional points to present here

1. How are questions asked?

2. How are interruptions handled?

2. Karen keeps control of the situation and maintains the direction she wants to go in. Andrew backs her up in this and they function well as a team, which further supports positive communication. 

Francoise: “What is the fixed invoice fee?”

Karen: “It depends…”

Sean: “can you give me a ballpark figure?” 

…

 

2. In the second video Francoise repeated what Karen said in a question to check if she understood it correctly. = reflective questions, very good point

Francoise: “So what we have to decide is how we want to pay: an even cost each month, or project by project.”

2.      How are interruptions handled?

1.video  - impatient

Sean: “Yeah, but do we get a choice on this?”

Francoise: “That was what I was saying.”

 

2.video  - more patient and timing was beter! better

Francoise: “Can you explain that?”

Karen: “Certainly. As you can see, …”
Well done, including quotes

 

b)       In conversation, each other is very often interrupted. Karen proceeds in the negotiation according to her plan, from A to B. The people of Levien often interrupt Karen with spontaneous questions. Karen finds this a bit annoying. Karen then always repeats the situation. Shortly after, a new question comes up.

Very good, look at top answer for remarks on type of question

2 In the first video Karren always tried to answer immediately. In the second video she answered the questions in a structured way. If the time was not right, Karren said that she would come back to the question in a moment.

Good, but no citations, and see top answers as well

In the second video the questions are asked much more consciously that they lead to a better understanding. For example: Francoise ‘’Can you explain that?’’

2.
 In the first video karen simply answers the questions without going back to the previous questions. For example: Karen ‘’The rates are on page twenty-two of the proposal. It depends…’’ and then Sean ‘’What about the call-out rate?’’ and then Karen ‘’It depends on the time of the day.’’

In the second video, Karen didn’t answer the question immediately, but came back to it later to answer the previous question first.

Very good, see top answer as well for type of questions

2. The interruptions were handled better in the second video with clear and specific questions respectively meaningfully answers.

Very good

Example Version 1: What is the fixed invoice fee? Add quotation marks
Example Version 2: Can you explain that? = relfective question, 'do you mean that... Am I right in understanding... These Qs serve functions, see answer above and the first one at top of this column

4.2. Version 1 who? does not really answer the questions and only refers to the handout information handed out (handout handed out, very poetic, haha) in advance. Version 2 on the other hand answers the question. The video doesn't, the people in it do

Example Version 1: What is the fixed invoice fee? Answer: The rates are on page twenty-two of the proposal…. 

Example Version 2: Can you explain that? à Answer: Certainly. As you can see, there are two levels…..

Very well done, incl. quotes

The dialog includes some interruptions. For example, “Sorry, Karen, before you go on...” 

 

Version 2: A finer better / more refined version then the first one. The participants are more respectful. There are no interruptions. For example, Karen lets Sean finish his sentence and then asks “can I come back to that in a moment?” 

Furthermore, there are some good comprehension questions “can you explain that” or “what is the difference between…?”
Very good, see other answers for some additional points

 

2. In the first video the interruptions were not handled very well. They seem to be disrespectful. Whereas in the second video, the counterparty lets the person speak and only then asks a question or adds a comment. Interruptions are handled much better and with more respect.
Good, but no examples (quotes)

 In the second video the questions are asked in such a way that what is said leads to a better understanding, as in this example:

 

2. In the first video Karen answers the questions without finishing the previous question. For example:

 

In the second video Karen answers the questions in detail and goes into the previous question to avoid misunderstandings.

2. Karen didn’t handle the interruptions at all. She just answered the questions and then the next question came. She didn’t say or do something about the interruptions. She handled it like it wasn’t a interruption at all there. ...there were no interruptions at all
Well done, scan other answers for more points

1.      Even though the positions are far apart, the interest are much wider and closer. When the interest overlaps, a solution fitting for both parties can be found.

2.      It separates the position from the interest. The positions are clear, the interest must be found. It means that the interest is “underground” and needs to be dug up.

3.      Position = What we want; interest = Why we want it

2.      Repetition or if the other party does not want to cooperate.

3.      Ask questions about your own position, ask what they think.

Video 1:

a)      The client does not understand the two proposals. They are not prepared for the meeting.

b)      Ask if the client can repeat the 2 offers in their own words as to check if they have understood them.

 

Video 2:

c)       Is active in asking questions when the answer was not clear.

d)      Give the client time to read through the documentation.

1.      In version 2 the questions leave a lot of room for explanations. In version 1 the explainer gets cut of mid-sentence.

2.      In version 2 the interruptions are kept in mind, but the first question will be discussed until the solution or answer is clear for all participants. In version 1 interruptions are immediately handled and this derails the conversation regarding the planned structure / schedule. 

1. The triangle represents the positions and interests of each party. Often there are completely different positions but there are shared interests. It is important to find these shared interests to find a solution which fits both parties.

2. It is the border between the interests which are below and the position which is above.

3. Interests are the underlying reasons a party has. The position is created on the interests to reach them. Interests describes the why and positions the how.

1. When you are listening well you can rather understand the interests of the opposite and find common interests.

2. When emotions are high in a discussion you may not listen to the other.

3. Be respectful and don’t interrupt the others.

Video 1: 

a. Because she wants to talk about something else and she thinks, she already answered the question, but they ask again.

b. She should better explain it.

Video 2:

c. He supports Karen and helps to underline the important things.

d. She is well prepared and can underline the things with parts on the papers. 

How are questions asked?

In the version 1, they ask an explanation for specific things like invoice fee, call out rate, ballpark figure etc. In contrast, in the version 2 they just ask if Karen could explain the things and what differenced are. This way, Karen has a better chance to explain things in her words and to concentrate on the important thing.

 

How are interruptions handled?

In version 2, Karen asks if it is okay to come back to the question in a moment. She wants to finish the subject first. In version 1 she doesn’t do this. She answers every question and is very irritated. Furthermore, the discussion has no good structure because of the interruptions.

It represents that the interests aren’t open to everybody. So, each party has to find out what the other’s interests are by asking questions. And every party shouldn’t focus on the position, rather than to the shared interests. 

 

2.       What is the function of the wavy line in the middle? What does it refer to?

Everything above the line shows what the other party already knows (positions). The interests that cannot be seen are shown below the line. 

 

3.        What is the difference between positions and interests?

Positions are clear and interests must be identified through questions. 

1.       In a negotiation, what are the advantages to be gained from listening well? 

On the one hand, it is beneficial to find out in interests of the other party. On the other hand, it shows trust and appreciation toward the other. 

 

2.       What might stop you from listening?

When you focus on your own positions and when there is no other solution for you than your own. 

 

3.       How can you ensure that you listen effectively to others and others listen effectively to you?

Write down the interests and keep a record, as well as repeat the answers of the other party. 

a)      Why does Karen get so frustrated?

She got so frustrated because Françoise and Sean wouldn't let her finish. 

 

b)      How could Karen ensure that Levien really understand what is on the table?

By putting the documents of the two offers on the table in advance and pre-announcing what she is about to say.

c)       What do you notice about Françoise’s participation?

She asks open questions and inquires whether she has understood the offers correctly.

 

d)      How does Karen manage the session?

She has a plan to present the two offers. She informs in advance what she wants to present.

1.       How are questions asked?

In the first video, the questions are asked rather closed and very direct. For example, from Sean “Can you give me a ballpark figure?” or “Yeah, but do we get a choice on this?”. 

 

In the second video, the questions are more open and friendly. There is a basis for negotiation through these questions. For example, from Sean “What’s the difference between project and regular support wort?” or “When is it a project and when is it just regular support work?”. 

 

2.       How are interruptions handled?

In the first video, the interruptions are received very hard. They are not answered in a friendly manner. For example, from Karen “That was what I was saying”. 

 

The second video shows that interruptions are not necessary at all, because people always ask and answer on a friendly basis. This for example from Françoise "Can you explain that?"

1.     Each triangle represents a person or an organization. Position is the information that each party is upfront in sharing while interests are not spoken about as freely. A shared interest is something that benefits both sides that might not be immediately apparent or clear.

2.     The wavy line represents a water line which is a metaphor for things that we don’t immediately show.

3.     Position is the information that each party is upfront in sharing while interests are not spoken about as freely. People usually take a position to satisfy their interests. If you know the other sides interests, you can make them feel understood.
Good, but see other answers for additional important info

1.     The advantages of listening well are to understand your counterparts’ interests and find shared interests. It’s easier to build rapport (make a connection) with the other side. Also, you can use some of the same words, which can bring down barriers because then they know that you are listening.

2.     Distractions such as noise can stop somebody from listening effectively. Also being stressed or relationship problems with other colleagues can stop you from listening.

3.     Concentrating and summarizing the other person's point of view can demonstrate good listening skills. Pausing between ideas can help the other person to fully absorb what you are saying.
1 good, 2 OK, 3 OK. See for all answers additional info in other participants' answers

Bad version:

a)     Karen probably isn’t well prepared or hasn’t been trained in negotiation skills. Perhaps she doesn’t feel supported by her business partner.

b)     She needs to speak calmly so they will understand her. She also didn’t address Levien’s concerns very well.

Good version:

c)     Francoise is more passive because Karen is dominating the conversation. Francoise also summarized what Karen said and this helps them to understand each other.

d)     Karen manages the session confidently because she addresses the concerns and provides page references. She seems relaxed and well prepared.

Version 1:

·       Sean asks questions quite abruptly

·       Karen interrupts her business partners several times without answering their questions 
 (for example about the options)

·       The tone of the discussion is not very friendly and helpful

 

Version 2:

·       Both parties seem to be well prepared and act as a functioning team

·       People are more considerate of others in the way they talk, for example Karen politely acknowledges Sean’s questions and explains something she thinks is more helpful

·       No one is interrupted

1.      On the surface each triangle can be compared to an iceberg. The tip of the iceberg represents the position of the parties and underneath their interests. The overlapping triangle in the middle illustrate the common interests. It is obvious that their position is visible to everyone, whereas the interests lie unspoken under the stated positions and cannot be seen at first sight.

2.      The function of the wavy line is it to set a boundary between the visible one’s, their position, and their unseen hidden interests. The visible part of the iceberg above the water line should represent all the shallow statements, but below the line you will get to know the reality of their situation. By gathering more information, you will get a better comprehension and a compromise may be reached. 

3.      Positions are what people say what they want or will accept, in order to get a better deal, while interests are what people really want and why they want it. They will not tell it right away. The key is it to find it out and then reach an agreement.
Very good answer, some grammar/vocabulary mistakes

1.      If you are listening to what the other side is talking about, then you probably will be able to identify their interests. Especially, when it comes down to emotional and difficult situations, mutual trust can be built and thus a better communication.

2.      You might stop listening to the other party, when what has been said is not very interesting or when it is too detailed.

3.      One indication for active listening is to keep eye contact with the other party while they are speaking. Conversely the speaker perceives you as a good listener. The second trick how to listen effectively is to keep the key points in mind during the discussion by constantly repeating them. It makes it easier for the listener later to briefly summarise what was said. Alternatively, notes can be written down.

Video 1:

a.      Karen gets so frustrated during the negotiation process because a proposal of two level of IT support has been presented to Françoise and Sean, but they seem to be clueless, and they are constantly jumping from question to question. Also, no agreement has been made yet.

b.      Firstly, Karen could have explained to Françoise and Sean what value they add to clients with their services and that Levien will be a in a better place with what they have to offer. Secondly after this has been discussed, the two levels of IT support could be introduced including their costs.

 

Video 2:

c.       Françoise holds on to one topic, the proposed two levels of IT support, and digs deeper into it by asking about the costs and the period of time. At the end she also summarizes the key points of what Karen has said before.

d.      Karen guides the participants through the proposal. Furthermore, she answers the questions of Françoise smoothly by indicating her the two options of IT support in the proposal. Before the questions got more specific, Karen wanted to make sure, the two levels of IT support were comprehended by everyone.

The questions in the first scenario have been asked very directly, particularly the figures have been addressed. Moreover, everything was not in order, there were questions regarding the fixed invoice fee, the call-out rate and the figures for project manager fees all mixed up. Also, the question of Sean, if they get a choice on this, proves that Karen wanted to force them into a corner without explaining them both options properly.

In the second version the questions had a framework. They were related to the content of the proposed two levels of IT support, such as the two questions of Karen: “So, we can’t be certain about how much the monthly invoice will be” and “So our contract would specify all IT projects for the next five years.”. Sean’s questions concern this time both options.

The interruptions in the first scene are handled poorly. Karen was not explaining their proposal to Levien properly, which is why Françoise were interrupting her when Andrew gave her the rates for project management, while she was speaking to Sean. To come back to Sean’s question concerning their options, Karen briefly and succinctly referred Sean to look on page thirty-four without expressing it in her words. 

Regarding the interruption in version two the situation took another turn. When Sean was asking about the difference between project and regular support work, while Karen was talking about the two levels of IT support, she was interrupting him politely by saying that she will come back to this later. She wanted to reassure that the parties understood, what their proposal was exactly about.

2.       It symbolises the border between visible and invisible positions and interests. Only if one dives into the matter completely, their true interests and thus perhaps shared interests can be revealed. This means that one has to put more effort into the whole process. 

3.       A position can be seen as an opinion and the interest is what drives someone to achieve their goals.

2.       A negative attitude towards the discussion in general or thinking that the other person is wrong about something etc.

3.       Have an interest in the topic, the person and cause! It makes the discussion more meaningful and will prevent your time being wasted. 

b.       She raises her voice and her facial expression gets very serious. 

c.       She listens to Karen more carefully and asks questions related to what Karen has been talking about before.

d.       She seems to be more in charge of the situation and acts like a leader. She asks that other topics can be discussed at a later point to make sure that the discussion does not lose direction.

How are the questions asked?

-          The questions aren’t structured but based on one word that jumped out to the opposite party of each sentence. The answer either gets interrupted or challenged by another question.

Example: Screenshot of text 

How are the interruptions handled?

-          In a rather flustered kind of way. This gives the impression, that Karen is a little bit annoyed with the whole situation and she seems stressed.

Video 2:

How are the questions asked?

-          Calmer and much more focused on the context of what was said in the sentence before. There is a structure in the whole conversation.

Example: Screenshot of text 

How are the interruptions handled?

-          There aren’t really any interruptions but rather follow-up questions. 

1.       Each triangle symbolizes one party in a negotiation process. Analyze the graph more closely: what do you think it represents? Briefly describe it. 

It’s quite similar with the Iceberg Theory. It shows above the wavy line the visible situation for both negotiation parts: like position. For an example if you want more salary – than the position is “I want a salary increase” and this is obviously to the opponent. But the position is only a little piece of the whole triangle – then the theory suggest that we cannot see most of the situation’s data: like interests. We hide this inside of ourselves, and we need to talk about it deeply and clearly. For this reason questions must be asked to find out “why the employee wants more money”. If the conversation gets further and deeper, you can find shared interests. This could be for an example: The company needs employees to start a new project and my employee is willing to work on it, so his or her workload will increase – so he or her will get a salary increase.  

2.       What is the function of the wavy line in the middle? What does it refer to? 

The wavy line shows the boundary of the visible and invisible side. It allows to shift perspectives and see beyond the hidden information. 

3.       What is the difference between positions and interests?

Positions are demands or refusals people make 

Interests are more emotional based like needs, hopes, fears and desires. Interests drive our actions and underlie the positions.
This can be true, in bizz negotiations however, the basic difference is what 'they' want, versus why 'they' want it, there is not necessarily a difference in psychological depth, emotionality, etc. between pos and int

1.       In a negotiation, what are the advantages to be gained from listening well? 

Your opponent might have more useful information that you thought. You can react more specifically and clearly if you listen actively. Furthermore, you can calm tensions, break the ice or impasse and create mor creativity if you care about your opponent through listening. 

2.       What might stop you from listening? 

If the opponent talks way too much and you have no chance to ask questions. If the conversations always lead in the same direction and the speaker repeat the information to often. It should be a dialogue not a monologue.

3.       How can you ensure that you listen effectively to others and others listen effectively to you?

Get to the point, talk about the most interesting and useful information. Make sure someone is writing a minutes and take notes by yourself if you need to do something or want to ask questions about it. Maybe it could be also very useful if you set rules at the beginning like “how you handle negotiations.” At the end summaries the spoken parts – so everyone has the same information. 

Video 1: https://moodle.fhnw.ch/mod/resource/view.php?id=1164494 

1.       Why does Karen get so frustrated? 

Because the other party wasn’t well prepared and didn’t listen quite well. She needed to explain the things first before they could negotiate about it. Furthermore, there wasn’t a good understanding of the other part – they didn’t let speak her out. 

2.       How could Karen ensure that Levien really understand what is on the table? 

She should ask at the beginning if there are questions about the different levels of pricing. Then if there are some, she can explain them clearly. Maybe she also could give the paper first let them read it and after explains again. 

Video 2: https://moodle.fhnw.ch/mod/resource/view.php?id=1164496 V 

This is an alternative scenario to what you have just seen in Video 1. 

3.       What do you notice about Françoise’s participation? 

She asks for explanation and make sure that she gets the information by asking deeper. She also listens quite well and is compared to the first video very calm and open minded. After the explanation she repeated the information from Karen again and asks for approval. 

4.       How does Karen manage the session?

In the beginning she coordinates to the page, which will be discussed further. As everyone was on the proposed site, she begins to explain the two different levels with the impacts. The conversation is more structured. 

1.       how are questions asked? 

Video 1: unstructured, directly, unfriendly and pushy 

Video 2: more structured, about the discussed topic, more polite 

2.       how are interruptions handled?

Video 1: Everyone just starts talking. The other part cannot finish what she/he is saying. 

Video 2: Everyone waits until the sentences have finished. 

Q1: The part on top is he part that is clear from the beginning. Both parties now what each one wants; they know the positions. But what is important is the part under the wavy line. The part that is hidden at the beginning and must be found in the negotiation. These are the interests of each party. The focus of the negotiation should be to find the shared interests so you can find a solution that fits both parties. 

 

Q2: The wavy line shows what is known from the beginning and what must be “uncovered”.

 

Q3: The position is the “what”. The interest is the “why”.

Q1: The advantage is that you actually get the important information from your counterpart. If you have all the information, you are in a much better position to negotiate. 

 

Q2: If the speaker from the other party tells you about the same things repeatedly. Or maybe he starts his sentence, and you think that you know the rest of the sentence. 

 

Q3: Make notes while listening. If you are the one speaking, try to make it exciting and try to not speak monotone. At the end summarize what you said. 

Video 1:

A: The didn’t let her speak out. let her finish her argument, sentences, etc. Furthermore, their preparation wasn’t sufficient. Karen had to explain some points again before they could even start the negotiation.

 

B: She could have given him the papers first so they could read it trough through. After that she could ask if there are any more questions and get them out of the way. 

 

Video 2:

C: Françoise asks a lot of questions to make sure that she understands all the details. After that she repeats it to make sure she got everything right. 

 

D: Everyone knows at the beginning how they start. The negotiation is much more structured than before. 

Q1:

Video 1: pushy, rude, all over the place

Video 2: structured, polite

 

Q2:

Video 1: The just interrupted each other. 

Video 2: Everybody lets everybody finished. It’s much more structured. 

·         Both people in a negotiation have their own positions and interests that they want to protect but if they become more personal and open, they will find also shared interests.
They need to explore further and discover why the positions are what they are: a company X can charge a high price because of previous losses, but maybe the other side can do something else to improve the financial situation of the company X - order regularly for a fixed amount of time, for example, also helpful for finances of X

 

2. What is the function of the wavy line in the middle? What does it refer to?

·         The line represents the basic need and point of view - if people are open to approach and discuss a point, they will find a common interest and be able to understand each other. See other answers as well

 

3. What is the difference between positions and interests?

·         Position: what each party wants (WANT)

·         Interest: basic human needs (NEED) Basic human need is wrong answer
DO NOT confuse reasons for positions (= interests) with basic needs as is deployed in marketing theory, the interests can be of the same nature as positions (not more basic, just hidden, not revealed so far), the reasons for positions need to be explored because they are not obvious at first, see example above

·         If you listen actively, you don't miss anything important and at the same time you can understand your counterpart better (and put yourself in his or her position).

·         Active listening often answers unanswered questions that come up during the conversation or that you already had before the meeting.

 

2. What might stop you from listening?

·         Music playing in the background, presentation slides with excessive text or images, etc.

·         If you are unfocused or have an adverse attitude.

 

3. How can you ensure that you listen effectively to others and others listen effectively to you?

·         I need to be open to the person's view (open attitude)

·         I can speak clearly and slowly enough, explain unclear terms already and work with facial expressions/gestures.

a. Why does Karen get so frustrated?

·         The people opposite never let Karen finish and ask far too many questions at once, she also gets no support from her colleague and feels alone and stressed as a result! They also don't listen to her carefully. She gets angry easily because she has to say things over and over again.

 

b. How could Karen ensure that Levien really understand what is on the table?

·         Instead of page numbers, she could just put the pages on the table and show the positions so that people know what she is talking about, and you can discuss the points at the same time.

 

 

Video 2: 

c. What do you notice about Françoise’s participation?

·         He is a listener first and lets Karen speak, but when there is a need for explanation, he helps her. He stands by her in need!

 

d. How does Karen manage the session?

·         The session is relatively well structured, and you understand what she wants. However, she comes across as a bit arrogant and people opposite don't like that.

·         The questions in video 2 are more detailed and in-depth, the peoples on the other side also gives the speaker more time to answer the questions. In video 1 they also ask too many questions in a short time and are also much more critical!

 

• how are interruptions handled?

·         In video 1, the person speaking becomes angry because the two people opposite do not let her get a word in edgewise and interrupt her often. In video 1 the two people also interrupt the speaker at the same time and make it impossible for the speaker to answer. In video 2 they let the speaker finish the sentence and wait until the person pauses to "interrupt" her with their questions.

Look at the graph and answer the questions below. 

 

1. Each triangle symbolizes one party in a negotiation process. Analyze the graph more closely: what do you think it represents? Briefly describe it. 

Each of the triangle shows a part. It represents their point of view and interests of the sides. The middle shows the same interests. 

 

2. What is the function of the wavy line in the middle? What does it refer to? 

The wavy line represents the different position and interest. 

 

3. What is the difference between positions and interests?

The position is the opinion of each side, and they stand behind that. The interest is the reason why they stand behind that and have this position.
Some misinterpretations, please see the other answers and comments in this column

listening well?

 

-you understand the background and can thus form an opinion better

-respectful treatment.

 

2. What might stop you from listening?

-When you're emotional or angry.

-You’re too stuck.

 

 

3. How can you ensure that you listen effectively to others and

others listen effectively to you?

-Speak clearly and distinctly.. Generally, keep it short and use simple sentences. 

-You should also keep eye contact.

 

Why does Karen get so frustrated? 

Karen is frustrated because the two other participants interrupt her and ask questions even though they already have the information in the handout.

She repeats herself several times, which frustrates her.

 

How could Karen ensure that Levien really understand what is on the table? 

She could go through the documents with her and explain every single point. In addition, Karen should ask her what exactly she does not understand so that she can explain it to her.

 

Video 2: https://moodle.fhnw.ch/mod/resource/view.php?id=1164496

This is an alternative scenario to what you have just seen in Video 1. 

c. What do you notice about Françoise’s participation? 

She refers to the letter and tells them where to find the information and explains each option individually. She lets the others speak and her voice and her gestures are not annoyed as in the first video.

 

d. How does Karen manage the session?

She leads the negotiation and explains her point of view. As well she does not let herself be disturbed. However, she answers the questions after explaining everything. Her pitch is determined, and she seems confident.

In version 1, she only gives answers and does not ask any open questions. 

She does not respond to the counterparty. She simply answered the questions. First of all she starts "No" and explains a lot. Towards the end you can tell from the way she answers that she is annoyed.

In the second version she asks open questions. She relates the other participants and picks up the questions and answers them later, just like when Sean asked her about the differences in the project.

 

   • how are interruptions handled? 

Towards, in version 1 at the end you can tell from the way she answers that she is annoyed.

When Sean asks Karen about his choice, she answers the question very annoyed, and everyone pulls up their eyes regarding her reaction.

Her behavior is much professional in version 2 than in version 1. She is the leader of the negotiation.

 

 

Look at the graph and answer the questions below. 

 

1. Each triangle symbolizes one party in a negotiation process. Analyze the graph more closely: what do you think it represents? Briefly describe it. 

Each triangle represents a part. It shows which point of view and interests the sides take. In the middle you can see a small triangle next to the 2 big triangles, where the common interests can be seen.

 

2. What is the function of the wavy line in the middle? What does it refer to? 

I think the wavy line represents the separation from position and interest. However, they are closely related, hence the wavy line.

 

3. What is the difference between positions and interests?

The understanding of positions is that both sides have an opinion and want to stand behind that position. The Interest is the reason why both sides have the position.

 

listening well?

 -This way you understand what the other party really wants. 

-This symbolizes that you respect the opposing party and take them seriously.

 

2. What might stop you from listening?

-When you're emotional or angry.

-When the other party speaks too quickly or too slowly and you don't wan’t or can’t listen.

 

 

3. How can you ensure that you listen effectively to others and

others listen effectively to you?

-Speak lively, clearly and distinctly. Don't use nested sentences for too long. Generally, keep it short and use simple sentences. 

-Also keep eye contact with the other party.

Why does Karen get so frustrated? 

Karen is frustrated because the two other participants interrupt her and ask questions even though they already have the information in the handout.

She repeats herself several times, which frustrates her.

 

How could Karen ensure that Levien really understand what is on the table? 

She could go through the documents with her and explain every single point. In addition, Karen should ask her what exactly she does not understand so that she can explain it to her.

 

Video 2: https://moodle.fhnw.ch/mod/resource/view.php?id=1164496

This is an alternative scenario to what you have just seen in Video 1. 

c. What do you notice about Françoise’s participation? 

She refers to the letter and tells them where to find the information and explains each option individually. She lets the others speak and her voice and her gestures are not annoyed as in the first video.

 

d. How does Karen manage the session?

She leads the negotiation and explains her point of view. As well she does not let herself be disturbed. However, she answers the questions after explaining everything. Her pitch is determined, and she seems confident.

 

In version 1, she only gives answers and does not ask any open questions. She does not go into the counterparty. She just answered the questions. In the introduction she starts with "No" and explains a lot. Towards the end you can tell from the way she answers that she is annoyed.

In the second version she asks open questions. She relates the other participants and picks up the questions and answers them later, just like when Sean asked her about the differences in the project.

 

   • how are interruptions handled? 

Towards, in version 1 at the end you can tell from the way she answers that she is annoyed.

When Sean asks Karen about his choice, she answers the question very annoyed, and everyone pulls up their eyes regarding her reaction.

Her behavior is much professional in version 2 than in version 1. She is the leader of the negotiation.

2.      The wavy line in the middle shows that the position of the other party can be seen and the (shared) interests of the other party can’t be seen. This means, that when two parties communicate together, they can find the position of the other party very quickly. But just with a negotiation, the parties can find their (shared) interests (=Iceberg model). 

3.      The difference between positions and interests is, that with a position you show the other party what aim you follow. If your negotiation partner just knows your position and he or she don’t agree with your aim, you can’t find a solution. But if you know the interests of your negotiation partner than you can find another way with whom you can solve the similar problem in a way which is also acceptable for you -> Win-Win-Situation.

2.      If you go with the setting “I know it better” or “I will do it in my way” than you won’t listen to your partner. And this kind of setting before a negotiation can not only destroy relationships, it also lead to misunderstandings or senseless discussions. 

3.      You can show your negotiation partner that you listen to him or to her, if you write down the most important things that he or she say. You can also ask questions to show him or her that you really want to understand his or her point of the view. If you want that your negotiation partner listens to you than you can tell him or her at the beginning of the negotiation that you want that he or she listens well and that you will also listens well when it’s his or her turn. You have also the opportunity to tell him or her that you really want a Win-Win-Situation, where both sides can be happy at the end.
1.      If you listen closely to your negotiation partner, the most important advantage you can gain is, that you can find the true interests of your partner. You can also avoid misunderstandings by listening carefully and build a better relationship because your partner will see that you make effort to understand him or her right.

2.      If you go with the setting “I know it better” or “I will do it in my way” than you won’t listen to your partner. And this kind of setting before a negotiation can not only destroy relationships, it also lead to misunderstandings or senseless discussions. 

3.      You can show your negotiation partner that you listen to him or to her, if you write down the most important things that he or she say. You can also ask questions to show him or her that you really want to understand his or her point of the view. If you want that your negotiation partner listens to you than you can tell him or her at the beginning of the negotiation that you want that he or she listens well and that you will also listens well when it’s his or her turn. You have also the opportunity to tell him or her that you really want a Win-Win-Situation, where both sides can be happy at the end.
Very good answers

 

a)      Karen gets so frustrated because her negotiation partners weren’t prepared for the negotiation. She had to tell them often where they can find the meaning of something. 

b)      Karen might send the papers one week before the negotiation and write down in the eMail, that they should prepare for the negotiation and that they could ask her if they don’t understand something. 

 

Video 2: 

 

c)      This time, Francoise asks Karen to explain something. 

d)      This time, Karen is more likely to manage the session because her negotiation partners ask questions to understand something better. They go step by step through the negotiation.
Good, see also some other answers, a few more points can be made

·         In the first Video they interrupt Karen before she’s done with her point. In the second Video they wait until Karen is done with her part and then they ask their questions (Karen: The rates are on page twenty-two of the proposal. It depends…).
Good answers, see also other answers for more points to make