Public Administration Essay

Brief introduction

‘Getting to Yes’ by William Ury is a book that gives a concise strategy that has been proven for parties in order to come to agreements that are mutually acceptable in any conflict that might arise. In a clear manner, the book gives a universally acceptable and concise method through which individuals can negotiate both professional and personal disputes without being influenced by anger. Ury discusses a number of techniques and negotiation tips which can be applied in all manner of situations; ranging from family situations, internal conflicts, business disputes, internal disputes among many other situations. The book analyzes a number of theories and tactics based on the day to day experiences. To make the subject have an international perspective, Ury uses the Harvard Negotiation Project. In essence, this organization deals with negotiation in all levels, mediation and other forms of conflict resolution. The approach given in the book is essential in that it enables the reader to lean a number of issues. In summary, the book equips the reader to understand how a problem should be separated from people, how people should focus on interest instead of positions, how and why people should work together to come up with relevant opinions that are able to satisfy all parties to a dispute, the approach that one should take when negotiating with more powerful people among many others. Published in the year 1991, the book has been employed in a number of situations to come up with relevant and long-lasting solutions. To date, a number of international organizations have cited the book as giving them directions on how to handle various matters that affect them. This is a resourceful material which is relevant I the present economy.

Thesis

Conflict resolution and management have always proved to be tricky issues to handle. If not properly addressed, minor conflicts can lead to the disintegration of n organization/group. Because of this, there is a great need to have and understand the best mechanisms through which conflicts can be solved within an organization. Although such conflicts differ from one organization to the other, it is important to note that solving them should take a certain procedure. In real sense, it would be very wrong to generalize such matters as every conflict has its components. International bodies and organizations have, however, come to the general consensus that solving a conflict entails employing a certain predictable and consistent mechanism that can yield fruits. With this in mind, Fisher, Roger and William set out to explain the approach and perspective that one should take when solving such conflicts. The fact that the book has since been translated to more than 18 languages is enough evidence that it is widely accepted and that he mechanisms discussed are effective. To date, more than a million copies of the book have been sold (of various editions). This further explains how exceptional the methods discussed are and how the general perception is that the book addresses the day to day issues in the globe. Written in a simple manner, the authors constantly give practical examples of what happens in a day o day basis. This is essential as it enables the readers to conceptualize whatever they learn and relate it to their daily lives. With this, it becomes easy and possible to internalize whatever issue the book addresses.

Golden Nuggets

The book has a number of important quotes that can guide one in the day to day attempts to find solutions to certain problems. This paper discusses some of the essential golden nuggets employed in the book.
“The more extreme the opening positions and the smaller the concessions, the more time and effort it will take to discover whether or not agreement is possible. (Fisher et al. 1981. P 65)” This quote essentially explains how one can predict how long the conflict resolution mechanism or approach can take before finding the relevant solution. In practice, if the parties to conflict resolution behave in a manner that is not appealing, it might take a lot of time before they can find common grounds for a solution. On the other hand, if the differences during the first meeting are not extreme, it would be wise to assume that the process will not take long without yielding results.
‘For more interesting examples from the Law of the Sea negotiations, see James K. Sebenius, Negotiating the Law of the Sea: Lessons in the Art and Science of Reaching Agreement’ (Fisher et al. 1981. P 76). This is where the authors refer to external sources o compliment their argument. The book or article referred to in this case is as regards to international negotiation on legal matters and the approach that was taken. By relating this to what the book addresses, it is possible to find a solution which is long-lasting.
“Any method of negotiation may be fairly judged by three criteria: It should produce a wise agreement if agreement is possible. It should be efficient. And it should improve or at least not damage the relationship between the parties. (Fisher et al. 1981. P 121)” In this quote, Ury and company describe means through which one can assess and analyze the negotiation mechanism on the table and whether such is effective. By meeting the three issues that the authors have highlighted, the process can be termed as being successful.
“The more you clarify your position and defend it against attack, the more committed you become to it. (Fisher et al. 1981. P 87)’’ In a nutshell, the authors advise persons to always defend their positions zealously without giving in easily. They should have clear objectives on what their arguments should be like and defend them to the best of their knowledge. In doing so, however, it is advisable that one be flexible to accept suggestions from the other parties to the extent that they do not harm one’s standing in the process.
“The more attention that is paid to positions, the less attention is devoted to meeting the underlying concerns of the parties. (Fisher et al. 1981. P 213)” This quote addresses the importance that should be paid to the subject matter. In practice, most people tend to argue based on the positions they take in organizations. When this is the case, it becomes more difficult to find a solution. The authors suggest that the parties to the process be focused on the issue without necessarily being carried away by the positions they take. This will enable them find a solution to their problems.
“People listen better if they feel that you have understood them. They tend to think that those who understand them are intelligent and sympathetic people whose own opinions may be worth listening to. So if you want the other side to appreciate your interests, begin by demonstrating that you appreciate theirs. (Fisher et al. 1981. P.39)” This quote is essential in any process as it encourages people to give their counterparts a chance to put across their points. This is the only way through which a solution to such problems can be found.

Contributions

With the conclusive manner that the book is written, it becomes difficult to give contributions as most issues are adequately discussed. Be that as it may, the book goes a long way to meet its objectives in giving people solutions to the challenges they face when making decisions or handling such processes. One aspect that the authors need to incorporate in the book is about patience and self-confidence. Whereas the process should entail two or more parties with contrary opinion, the parties should not behave in an adversarial manner, the extent to which they might destroy the core objective of the process. Disagreeing politely is advisable in such situations. In such matters, it is also important that the parties be patient with the counterparts so as to make decisions that are beneficial to both. A party to these processes should never be rigid; flexibility is essential for the common good of the process. If these are taken into account, then the process should be successful.

Strengths

The book has a number of strengths that give it n advantage over others. First, the book s written in a manner that is simple and understandable to all. With this, the authors eliminated the potential problem of being difficult to understand. They used simple terms that everybody can identify with in the day to day experience of life. Wherever they have used difficult words, they have gone ahead to explain the meanings. This is very crucial.
Apart from the above, the book gives practical examples that happen in organizations and how the parties address such issues. This gives the reader an opportunity to relate whatever hey read and whatever they encounter on a day to day basis. This approach is crucial as it gives readers an opportunity to feel part and parcel of the discussion.

Weaknesses

It is very difficult to envisage this source as having weaknesses. One of the challenges, however, is that the source is very bulky. With this, it poses a major challenge to individuals who do not embrace the habit of reading. An individual who does not fancy reading heavy materials will definitely find it difficult to go through this material and would opt to look for a summary of the main points. This is something that the authors have not given in any form. This weakness cannot be easily addressed; hence the aggrieved parties may not have any remedy to this.

Relevance

This material is very essential and relevant in the modern economy at the moment. The 21st century has seen a number of organizations collapse due to their inability to find solutions to minor issues. With conflicts emerging daily n the corporate world, there is a necessity to have in place necessary mechanisms and processes of handling them. To this extent, the book would seem a perfect source on the means on how to handle such problems. Organizations and other bodies should be well equipped with this material to ensure that they understand what is required during such difficult times.
Conclusion

References

Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.