Scribd
Upload
19 views5 pages

Real

Uploaded by

Dhruv Malhotra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
19 views5 pages

Real

Uploaded by

Dhruv Malhotra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Real-Life Negotiation Reflection Essay

Introduction

Negotiations are not always successful, but even failed attempts can be valuable learning

experiences. My negotiation with my parents to allow me to study at the University of

Melbourne in Australia serves as an example of a high-stakes discussion where differing

priorities and perspectives led to an impasse. A critical aspect of this negotiation was the

significant decision for me to move from India to Australia, which carried logistical,

emotional, and cultural implications. This essay examines the negotiation process, analyzing

my strategy, the challenges I faced, and the lessons I learned. By reflecting on this experience

and connecting it to negotiation theories, I aim to identify areas for improvement and

strategies for future success.

The Context and Nature of the Negotiation

The context was my desire to pursue higher education at the University of Melbourne, known

for its world-class curriculum and multicultural environment. However, this also involved a

monumental decision to move from India to Australia, which was a primary concern for my

parents. The prospect of me living so far from home raised apprehensions about cultural

adjustment, financial burden, and my readiness for independent living.

The stakes were high: for me, it represented a chance to gain global exposure and access top-

tier academic opportunities; for my parents, it involved significant sacrifices and fears of

losing day-to-day connection with me. The relationship dynamic was one of mutual respect
but contrasting priorities. While they valued my ambition, they also prioritized financial

prudence, emotional proximity, and the comfort of me remaining in India.

My Approach and Strategy

To prepare for the negotiation, I gathered information about the University of Melbourne’s

programs, its international ranking, and career prospects for graduates. I also created a rough

financial plan, including scholarships and part-time work opportunities, to demonstrate that I

was mindful of the economic implications. Additionally, I researched the social and cultural

environment in Australia to address concerns about adjustment and safety.

My strategy centered on persuasive argumentation and problem-solving. I highlighted how

this opportunity aligned with their values, such as education and career advancement.

Tactically, I employed logrolling, offering to forego luxuries like frequent travel home in

exchange for their support.

However, I underestimated the emotional weight of moving so far from home. Instead of

addressing their fears directly, I focused too heavily on presenting facts and figures. This

oversight made my approach feel one-sided and did not adequately acknowledge their

emotional concerns.

The Outcome

The negotiation ultimately failed. While my parents acknowledged the merits of the

University of Melbourne, their concerns about finances, cultural differences, and my

readiness for the drastic change of moving to Australia outweighed the potential benefits.
They suggested alternative universities within India that offered quality education at a lower

cost and with less upheaval to family life. I felt disappointed, and they felt their concerns

were not adequately addressed. The outcome highlighted a disconnect between our priorities

and communication styles.

Parallels to Course Learnings

This experience underscores several negotiation concepts and frameworks discussed in class.

For instance, the Interest-Based Relational Approach (IBRA) suggests focusing on interests

rather than positions, but I failed to fully explore their deeper concerns. Their position was

“no to Australia,” but their underlying interests were financial security, emotional connection,

and ensuring my preparedness for a significant life transition. Had I addressed these interests

more thoroughly, the negotiation might have had a different trajectory.

Another key concept was the role of anchoring. My initial emphasis on Melbourne’s prestige

and career prospects set an ambitious anchor, but it also created a perception of rigidity. A

more flexible anchor, such as discussing other universities abroad with lower costs or shorter

distances from home, could have softened their resistance.

The lack of a strong BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) also weakened my

case. I relied too heavily on the assumption that studying in Australia was the only viable

path for my goals, which made my argument appear one-dimensional.

What I Would Change


With the benefit of hindsight and knowledge gained from this course, I would revise my

approach in several ways:

1. Prioritize Active Listening: Instead of dominating the conversation with facts and figures, I

would create space for their concerns. Techniques like mirroring and paraphrasing would help

build empathy and trust.

2. Expand My BATNA: I would research other international universities with comparable

programs but lower costs or closer proximity to India. This would demonstrate my flexibility

and commitment to finding a middle ground.

3. Use Collaborative Framing: I would frame the discussion as a shared effort to achieve a

mutually beneficial outcome, emphasizing how their support aligns with my long-term goals

and their values. Acknowledging the emotional and cultural impact of moving from India to

Australia would have been crucial here.

4. Integrate Emotion with Logic: While I focused on logical arguments, I neglected the

emotional dimension. Incorporating emotional appeals, such as expressing gratitude for their

support and understanding their sacrifices, could have strengthened my case.

What Worked and What Didn’t


What worked was my preparation. The detailed financial plan and career prospects data

impressed my parents and showed my seriousness. However, my execution faltered due to

poor communication and an inability to adapt to their emotional and practical concerns. My

singular focus on Melbourne inadvertently alienated them, as it seemed I was prioritizing my

dreams over their sacrifices.

The strategy of logrolling partially succeeded, as they appreciated my willingness to

compromise on certain aspects. However, it wasn’t enough to overcome their reservations, as

I failed to address the cultural and emotional challenges of moving from India to Australia

effectively.

Conclusion

This failed negotiation was a significant learning experience. It highlighted the importance of

balancing logic with emotion, actively addressing the other party’s interests, and remaining

flexible in high-stakes discussions. While the outcome was not what I had hoped for, the

insights gained from this experience have shaped my approach to negotiation, equipping me

with the tools to handle future challenges more effectively. By applying these lessons and the

course’s theoretical frameworks, I am confident in my ability to negotiate successfully in the

future, even in complex and emotionally charged scenarios.

You might also like