商務談判: 謀求“雙贏”還是“輸贏”，為什么？
Two possibilities exist about the way we view the negotiation process. The moderately aggressive stance is where we look out primarily for a strong gain for ourselves. The win-win concept is where we look for our best interest, but where we understand that the other person's interests, if served well, can often serve ours even better. To be effective, both parties must feel they have won.
Good negotiation is not about getting everything your own way. It is about balancing each other. You don't defer to your counterpart and concede all that he or she wants - you have your own aspirations, which you must secure. That requires two-way movement which produces win-win. It affects the business relationship positively. It also enables us to achieve not just more sales or better supply, but more importantly, the growth in profit that we are all looking for.
In effective negotiation we should not only be concerned about our own goals and objectives. We should have a genuine interest in, and a good grasp of, what the other party is hoping for or aiming for. The more we can help the other party to achieve what they want, the more likely we are to achieve what we are looking for from the deal. Some trainers assert that you should focus on your own position only. The logic behind this is that the other party is the only one who knows what is best for them. That is probably true with skilled negotiators, but with inexperienced negotiators genuine two-way concern is often necessary.
The more genuine interest we can show in the other party and their aspirations, the less threatened they will be, the more they will volunteer information and the more likely we are to reach an ideal solution. If you can think win-win rather than win-lose you will become more effective, less stressed and always better in the long term.
A small software developer who worked for his client for two or three years graphically illustrated this. It seemed that at every opportunity, the client would try to screw more discount, more value, more price reductions. The software developer got fed up with the approach and allowed his feelings to dictate his response. He dug his heels in, and focused on his own interests. The result was alienation. Had there been frank dialogue, if both parties could have thought through what was important to the other, an amicable and profitable solution would have easily been found.
****************************************************************
--文章注釋--
moderately adv.適度地 stance n.立場，觀點
defer to sb 順從某人 counterpart n.對方
concede vt.給與 aspiration n.愿望，目標
secure vt.獲得，得到 objective n.目標
genuine adj.真誠的，真實的' grasp n.掌握，了解
assert vt.主張，斷言 graphically adv.生動詳細地
illustrate vt.闡明，舉例說明 screw vt.貪占（便宜）
reduction n.降低，減少 dictate v.主宰，統治
alienation n.疏遠 amicable adj.親善的，友好的
Had there been frank dialogue, if both parties could have thought through what was important to the other, an amicable and profitable solution would have easily been found.
（本句為虛擬語氣）
如果雙方能坦誠對話，并相互考慮對方的著眼點，原本可以輕松找到既友好又雙贏的解決方案。
【商務談判: 謀求“雙贏”還是“輸贏”，為什么？】相關文章：
商務談判雙贏的原則07-28
商務談判的雙贏成因11-05
為什么學了好多技巧色彩還是畫不好09-16
書籍《輸贏》讀書筆記12-14
國際象棋輸贏規則10-02
為什么優化都到位了網站還是沒有排名11-15
雙贏的智慧職場勵志02-15
商務談判禮儀10-06
創業秘訣成功的談判是雙贏09-14
啟用公積金是一種雙贏07-19