Negotiation Skills Knowledge Creations and Transfer

Question: Discuss about theNegotiation Skillsfor Knowledge Creations and Transfer. Answer: Introduction Negotiation skills are one of the most prized assets in employees and are repeatedly listed by employers in job descriptions (Kelchner, 2017). Since not every employee possesses a mastery of these skills, it is imperative that organizations provided avenues for their personnel to attain them. A 2003 study titled: Learning Negotiation Skills: Four Models of Knowledge Creations and Transferreviewed literature in a bid to establish the most effective and commonly used methods of training negotiation skills followed by an examination of the efficacy of different learning methods in the improvement of negotiation skills. Four commonly used learning negotiation skills that were put to the test included:learning via information revelation, principle-based learning, analogical learning and observational learning (Nadler, Thompson Van Boven, 2003). An in-depth outline- in theory, and with empirical evidence- of the techniques provides employers with an opportunity to put in measures for empl oyees to horn their negotiation skills. The author provides an outline of the learning techniques using the findings of related studies thus providing audiences with a summary of the already existent information on the selected techniques.To begin with, Principle-based learning, variously referred to as didactic learning and regarded as the most used educational tool in negotiation has various features and the most important is as follows:It is based on the premise that in order to attain a solution that is integrative, negotiators need to conceptualize the situation(Nadler, Thompson Van Boven, 2003). Further, the author explains that Learning via information revelation encompasses that access to the other partys information regarding their priorities and preferences in a prior negotiation allows negotiators to correct their interpretation of their negotiated agreement. The above description is accurate, and Takemura (2014) agrees to explain that outcomes follow from peoples initial judgments and predictions, which are th en used to determine actions and choices. Moreover, an in-depth description of observational learning which is based on the idea that observation of other negotiators can improve the negotiating skills of employees is provided. The social learning theory, psychological mechanisms and the critical processes involved in observational learning are just but a few of the evidence outlined in support of the technique(Nadler, Thompson Van Boven, 2003).Lastly, a theoretical background of analogical learning is provided. Cited are the findings on the relevance of analogy in learning and understanding and the standard approaches to the techniques(Nadler, Thompson Van Boven, 2003). In addition to the above, the author outlines some of the limitations to the technique that will be expounded on when analyzing the findings and conclusions from the article. In a bid to establish which of the above-mentioned techniques is the most effective, four different learning conditions were created in correspondence to the four subject techniques. The following groups of subjects are used to establish effectiveness: all participants in the study population were engaged in negotiation with no formal learning, then divided the sample population into those who will receive no further learning and those that will be subjected to the different techniques. These groups were compared in the end. Performance on the task (negotiation) was used as a key measure of learning. In accordance with the findings, various ideas are put across in the article. Firstly, individuals with either of observational training and analogical training performed better in negotiations as compared to those subjected to the other two forms of training and those who received no training whatsoever- the baseline group. This is in line with Albert Banduras assertion that by observing someone elses activity learning could occur and reproduced when faced with a similar situation (Huitt, 2004). Secondly, individuals subjected to observational and analogical techniques exhibited more creativity in their negotiations. Wyer, (2014) agrees with this fact basing his reasons on cognitivesocial psychology citing the individual subjected to the two methods of learning normally exhibit superiority. A particular example of this fact is the construction of profitable tradeoffs in that the individuals subject to the above mentioned constructed profitable tradeoffs.Thirdly, an idea that contrad icts prior research was in relation to the absence of a significant difference between the performances of individuals subjected to analogical and didactic techniques. Such a deduction is baffling considering the current study concludes that in addition to observational training, analogical training was effective. It is important to note that the techniques were reviewed using findings from other studies and theoretical descriptions from scholars in order to form a basis for comparison. However, some of the findings outlined in the article contradict some of the features and the perceived outcomes of the of the training as per the theoretical descriptions of the techniques. For instance, learning via information revelation technique stipulates that negotiators are receiving information regarding the priorities and preferences of their opponents in the first encounter post desirable results in subsequent negotiations since they are able to transfer the acquired knowledge (Takemura, 2014). This was not the case as indicated by the findings. Again, a similar outcome was observed among the individuals that were subjected to a didactic technique where the definitions indicated by literature are not in line with the findings. This either points to a flaw in the methodology or an indication of the ne ed for more research in the training technique. Regardless, the above deductions from a review of the findings outlined in the article are not suggestive of the fact the study is a failure but only point to the fact that a more vigorous research design is needed. Also, this doesnt take away the revelation that a couple of beneficial lessons are manifest from the findings in the article being critiqued.Some of the lessons include, analogical and observational training are effective. Hence, provided is a look into some of the mechanisms used in learning within organizations (Moran, Bereby-Meyer, Bazerman, 2004). Even more, the breakthrough regarding the techniques mentioned above establishes a link to cognitive- social psychology thus encouraging the incorporation of related principles in the developments of professional skills such as negotiation. References Huitt, W. (2004). Observational (social) learning: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date], from https://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/soccog/soclrn.html Kelchner, L. (2017). Top Ten Effective Negotiation Skills. Smallbusiness.chron.com. Retrieved 26 May 2017, from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/top-ten-effective-negotiation-skills-31534.html Nadler, J., Thompson, L., Boven, L. V. (2003). Learning negotiation skills: Four models of knowledge creation and transfer. Management Science, 49(4), 529-540. Takemura, K. (2014). Behavioral Decision Theory and Good Decision Making. In Behavioral Decision Theory (pp. 167-202). Springer Japan. Moran, S., Bereby-Meyer, Y., Bazerman, M. H. (2004). Getting more out of analogical training in negotiations: Learning core principles of creating value. (2004) Wyer, R. S. (2014). The automaticity of everyday life: Advances in social cognition (Vol. 10). Psychology Press.