|
Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (平装)
by Roger Fish, William L. Ury, Bruce Patton
| Category:
Negotiation, Communication, Business skills |
| Market price: ¥ 168.00
MSL price:
¥ 148.00
[ Shop incentives ]
|
| Stock:
In Stock |
MSL rating:
 Good for Gifts |
| MSL Pointer Review:
Originally written as negotiation tactics for lawyers, this bestselling book offers proven steps to help you get what you want. |
| If you want us to help you with the right titles you're looking for, or to make reading recommendations based on your needs, please contact our consultants. |
|
| |
AllReviews |
1 Total 1 pages 10 items |
|
|
Tomas Ashley (MSL quote), USA
<2006-12-27 00:00>
This is the best book on negotiation you will find. It is clear, and the insights are easy to put to use. Take the idea of looking underneath positions to interests. It is a simple idea. And it is the essence of whether a negotiation will turn sour or successful. My one big complaint is that this book doesn't go into too much depth on dealing with the people problem. (Separating the peopel from the problem is not helpful enough for me.) But Fisher just came out with a new book that goes to the heart of emotions and is a perfect sequel. |
|
|
Rolf Dobelli (MSL quote), Switzerland
<2006-12-27 00:00>
Authors Roger Fisher, William L. Ury and Bruce M. Patton offer a seminal step-by-step guide to negotiating effectively. The authors use anecdotal examples to illustrate both positive and negative negotiating techniques. They believe that, with principled negotiation, both parties can reach an agreement in an amicable and efficient manner. Principled negotiation is based on the belief that when each side comes to understand the interests of the other, they can jointly create options that are mutually advantageous, resulting in a wise settlement. Since this is the second edition, the authors take the opportunity to answer ten common questions from readers of the first edition. If you become skeptical about these fairly rosy negotiation techniques as you read, the Q and A section is very useful. This classic text is easy to understand and you can implement its techniques immediately. We can’t ask for more than that. |
|
|
A reader (MSL quote), USA
<2006-12-27 00:00>
If you're searching for a book to help you with conflict resolution, look no further: This universally praised volume, known for its effective "separate the people from the problem" philosophy, is the definitive guide for would-be negotiators who want to turn antagonism into collaboration. Although countless workshops and corporate seminars have been based on this book, it's worth noting that its principles are equally effective in managing domestic and personal clashes. So, if there's a relationship that's not working for you, pick up a copy of Getting to Yes and start making it better. |
|
|
Victor Alvearez (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
"Reading the pamphlet on the Royal Canadian Air Force exercises will not make you physically fit. Studying books on tennis, swimming, riding a bicycle, or riding a horse will not make you an expert. Negotiation is no different." - From Getting to Yes
Wise words indeed. Anyone expecting a "how-to" method from any book on negotiation is in the wrong field of study. The best one can expect is a general framework, and that is what this book provides.
Fisher and Ury advocate what they refer to as "principled negotiation", a style of negotiation where there are no winners and losers. Agreements are reached rationally by considering the motives each party has for maintaining a their position. People are separated from the issues at hand, and emotions are controlled. There is a strong emphasis on rationality, using objective criteria.
Unfortunately, human beings aren't always capable of controlling their emotions and being rational. Or sometimes simply refuse to negotiate. Fisher and Ury recognize this, and provide a framework for tackling these issues, centered on what they call BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement).
Overall a great book, but, as the authors themselves would concede, no substitution to negotiation experience.
|
|
|
Bryan Krug (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
It's amazing to me that this book was written over twenty years ago, but is still so relevant. Negotiation is a passion of mine, and I have read this book multiple times because the ideas presented in it are the basis for almost any book that has been written on negotiation since its publication. Plus, it is a quick read that almost anyone can understand.
This book revolutionized negotiation with its claim that you would be better off if the person that you were negotiating with also read this book. Rather than focusing on tricks and ways to manipulate the other side, it shows you how to set up a cooperative, win-win negotiation.
Such terms as win-win negotiation, cooperative problem solving, BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement), and negotiation jujitsu might sound trite because they are used so frequently in other negotiation texts. However, I'm willing to look past that since these terms originated here.
In multiple negotiations - big and small - I have used the process outlined in this book (1. "separate the people from the problem", 2. "focus on interests, not positions", 3. "invent options for mutual gain", 4. "insist on using objective criteria") to produce successful results.
Your ability to negotiate affects so many parts of your life (from how much money you make to how you resolve conflicts with your spouse) that it is worth investing in this book and in becoming a better negotiator.
While (because the book is a tad idealistic) I do not recommend making this the only book that you read on negotiation, I highly recommend it as one of the books to read. I'd also recommend checking out "Getting Past No" by Bill Ury, which is the follow-on to this and discusses how to handle situations in which the other side doesn't want to cooperate.
|
|
|
Henry Cate (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
This is a very good book about how to work out agreements with other people. The authors start off saying that many people negotiate some where along a spectrum of easy or hard negotiating, either they are willing to get along and often may give up something they really want, or they will push and push for what they want. The authors say it is better to stay back and figure out what is a fair deal for both sides. For example in buying a car you would look at what other people are paying for a similar model and number of miles. Or in getting a job the salary should be competitive with other people with similar backgrounds. The key point is to try and find ways to decide if an agreement is fair.
The method is basically:
1) Separating the people from the problem
2) Focusing on the interests, not positions
3) Inventing options for mutual gain
4) Insisting on using objective criteria
|
|
|
James East (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
The very good point and theme of "Getting To Yes" is that it is better to start a negotiation objectively than to start one positionally. Anyone can negotiate positionally by just naming a price or stance and then hold a "take it, or leave it" posture. However, to have real meaningful negotiations and subsequent strong agreements/contracts, one needs to go the extra mile or put in the extra effort to discuss things objectively.
While others report that there were not enough examples in the book or any psychological reasons why objective negotiation works over other techniques, I propose they missed the point in that objective review identifies the real issues that are to be or need to be overcome in the negotiation process. This is due to the fact that objective negotiations focus on the basic interests, mutually satisfying options, and most importantly the fair standards which to judge the ultimate strong agreement.
With the objective approach, one is always asking "because why" to determine the standards and fairness behind what the other party is judging the negotiation from. Without the standard from which each party starts, it may be difficult to reach a strong agreement that will last over bumps in the road that may occur in the future. In addition, questions will tend to generate answers, whereas, statements tend to generate resistance of which you do not want.
Other topics and techniques are discussed like, separate the people from the problem, focus on interests, create options, and others, but the big takeaway is objectivity should come from both sides. If done so, your agreements/contracts may have a better chance of lasting longer and repeat business may keep coming back.
|
|
|
J. Hoelscher (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
Getting to Yes started a revolution in negotiation, both by stressing principled negotiation and in making the material accessible to a very wide audience. It is still a good read, is still taught in universities and continuing education, and is an excellent starting point for people who are new to negotiation but intend a deep study because of its historical significance and its content.
However, having taught Getting to Yes and having used principled bargaining in practice, I think there are a few shortcomings that are dealt with in other books. While Fischer and Ury do make the point that principled bargaining includes sticking to your priciples and not being a pushover, it is not emphasized enough. I have even found myself being too cooperative after reviewing this text because the emphasis is on being cooperative. I think this is a partcular danger for new/lay negotiators, especially if this is the first text they're exposed to or they intend to practice these concepts in daily life. The tone of the book is just a bit too friendly. As a result, there has been a backlash (wrongly, in my opinion) against this text in some quarters.
The verbal judo section at the end is excellent, giving techniques for dealing with unreasonable people that are great. I would've liked more of these very practical tips and examples to go along with them, but the book as a whole is already a lot to digest. Newer versions of Getting To Yes do add more material here.
Newer texts take these problems into account. The best, in my opinion, is the follow-on by Ury, Getting Past No. It can be read without having read Getting to Yes, although it is very interesting as a follow-on, too. In it, Ury is clearly taking into account the criticism that Getting To Yes was too soft and he presents a more robust vision of principled bargaining.
|
|
|
Paul Baker (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
I like this negotiation book because it emphasizes the win-win situation yet its system is flexible enough to deal with those who do not want to play that way. On the other hand, I am still intrigued by the use of standards. The authors propose that, in order to achieve some level of, shall we say "fairness," one should resort to the use of established standards that help both parties to gain a perspective. One example was about oil drilling rights in international waters. There was a disagreement that polarized relatively rich nations against relatively poor nations, and only after the discovery and use of an oil drilling economics model developed at MIT did the impasse begin to melt. However, what happens if the standard/model itself is developed with a biased opinion? One example might be the customs used in apartheid South Africa that were clearly biased towards whites. In summary, this book has important points (e.g. look at the interests behind the positions), but more work could be done to clarify the use of some principles. |
|
|
Adam Rogers (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-19 00:00>
This book was recommended reading as part of a class in negotiation at NYU. I was a bit skeptical at first, as the cover made it look like the kind of popculture books they sell in grocery store check-out lines. I was quickly proven wrong. I just hope I will be able to apply the lessons learned therein. Up to now I have engaged mostly in what the authors call "positional bargaining." I now know the difference between this and "prinicipled negotiation," which will hopefully help me get over my Scorpio tendency of stinging anyone who disagrees with me!
|
|
|
|
1 Total 1 pages 10 items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
