Jan 29

If negotiation fails in a Detroit custody battle, you have reached an impasse. An impasse is when you cannot come to an agreement.

Child custody negotiation can fail for many reasons. Perhaps you approached the negotiations in good faith, but the other parent had a hidden agenda-such as wanting to hurt you or to live better at your expense.

Or maybe one of you was too emotional to negotiate-letting feelings of insecurity or jealousy get in the way. Or maybe one of you is simply a litigious ex-spouse, viewing any negotiated agreement as a “giving in” or “surrendering” to the other parent.

Whatever the reason, if you still need a resolution, you will have to use another Detroit custody battle dispute resolution method. These include forms of alternative dispute resolution-such as mediation, arbitration, and conciliation-and litigation.

The Story Of Sheree and Keith

Sheree and Keith had two children when they divorced, Ethan, age four, and Katherine, age two. The Arkansas divorce decree specified that Sheree have primary physical custody, but the parents shared the children equally until Ethan entered kindergarten. Sheree then remarried, and announced she was moving to Tennessee. Keith responded by asking for custody of the children. The Chancery Court awarded him custody, but the Court of Appeals reversed, finding that “children belong to a different family unit than they did when their parents lived together. The new family unit consists of the children and the custodial parent, and what is advantageous to the unit’s members as a whole, to each of its members individually, and to the way they relate to each other and function together is in the best interests of the children.” Hollandsworth v. Knyzewski (2002) Arkansas No. CA 01-982.

Mental Health Resources

If you need some advice, these official sites all feature solid information and links to other sites:

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

http://www.aacap.org

Click on “Facts for Families” for more information.

National Institute of Mental Health

http://www.nimh.nih.gov

This site has good information “For the Public.”

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

http://www.mentalhealth.org

To select a topic, enter it in the search box.

American Psychological Association Consumer Help

helping.apa.org

This “consumer” site gives short information, free brochures, and a toll-free number to find a psychologist.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

http://www.samhsa.gov

Click on “Publications” for access to directories, help lines, publications, and more.

A Detroit custody battle can come down to negotiation and when negotiations fail you need to know which way to go.

Brent Delaurentis is a father of a 6 year old girl and webmaster of a child custody blog. Because he went through a long and painful custody battle he knows exactly how parents who have to go through this feel. That’s why he recommends The Child Custody Strategy Package ceated by 2 child custody experts Dr. Bricklin and Dr. Elliot. This proven strategy package goes into great detail how any mother or father in a custody battle can win their custody case. With free bonuses like the Child Custody Checklist (49 actions to take to help you win your custody case) it is the single greatest investment a mother or father can make when in a custody dispute. Win Your Custody Case

Recommend : Clackmannanshire Flintshire Anaheim http://toasterovencom.co.cc/


Jan 29

What you say in the first few moments of a negotiation often sets the climate of the negotiation. The other person quickly gets a feel for whether you are working for a win-win solution, or whether you’re a tough negotiator who’s out for everything they can get.

That’s one problem that I have with the way that attorneys negotiate-they’re very confrontational negotiators. You get that white envelope in the mail with black, raised lettering in the top left hand corner and you think, “Oh, no! What is it this time?” You open the letter and what’s the first communication from them? It’s a threat. What they’re going to do to you, if you don’t give them what they want.

I remember conducting a seminar for 50 attorneys who litigated medical malpractice lawsuits, or as they prefer to call them, physician liability lawsuits. I’ve never met an attorney who was eager to go to a negotiating seminar, although that’s what they do for a living, and these people were no exception to the rule. However, the organization that was giving the attorneys their business told them that they were expected to attend my seminar if they wanted to get any more cases from the organization. So the attorneys weren’t too happy about having to spend Saturday with me in the first place, but once we got started, they became involved and were having a good time. I got them absorbed in a workshop involving a surgeon being sued over an unfortunate incident involving a nun and walked around the room to see how they were doing. I couldn’t believe how confrontational they were being. Most of them started with a vicious threat and then became more abusive from that point on. I had to stop the exercise and tell them that if they wanted to settle the case without expensive litigation (and I doubted their motives on that score) that they should never be confrontational in the early stages of the negotiation.

So, be careful what you say at the beginning. If the other person takes a position with which you totally disagree, don’t argue. Arguing always intensifies the other person’s desire to prove himself or herself right. You’re much better off to agree with the other person initially and then turn it around using the Feel, Felt, Found formula. Respond with, “I understand exactly how you feel about that. Many other people have felt exactly the same way as you do right now. (Now you have diffused that competitive spirit. You’re not arguing with them, you’re agreeing with them.) But you know what we have always found? When we take a closer look at it, we have always found that . .”

Let’s look at some examples:

  • You’re selling something, and the other person says, “Your price is way too high.” If you argue with him, he has a personal stake in proving you wrong and himself right. Instead, you say, “I understand exactly how you feel about that. Many other people have felt exactly the same way as you do when they first hear the price. When they take a closer look at what we offer, however, they have always found that we offer the best value in the marketplace.”
  • You’re applying for a job, and the human resources director says, “I don’t think you have enough experience in this field.” If you respond with “I’ve handled much tougher jobs that this in the past,” it may come across as, “I’m right and you’re wrong.” It’s just going to force her to defend the position she’s taken. Instead, say, “I understand exactly how you feel about that. Many other people would feel exactly the same way as you do right now. However, there are some remarkable similarities between the work I’ve been doing and what you’re looking for that are not immediately apparent. Let me tell you what they are.”
  • If you’re a salesperson and the buyer says, “I hear that you people have problems in your shipping department,” arguing with him will make him doubt your objectivity. Instead, say, “I understand how you could have heard that because I’ve heard it too. I think that rumor may have started a few years ago when we relocated our warehouse; but now major companies such as General Motors and General Electric trust us with their just-in-time inventories, and we never have a problem.”
  • If the other person says, “I don’t believe in buying from off-shore suppliers. I think we should keep the jobs in this country,” the more you argue the more you’ll force him into defending his position. Instead, say, “I understand exactly how you feel about that, because these days many other people feel exactly the same way as you do. But do you know what we have found? Since we have been having the initial assembly done in Thailand, we have actually been able to increase our American work force by more than 42 percent and this is why . . .”

    So instead of arguing up front, which creates confrontational negotiation, get in the habit of agreeing and then turning it around.

    At my seminars, I sometimes ask a person in the front row to stand. As I hold my two hands out, with my palms facing toward the person I’ve asked to stand, I ask him to place his hands against mine. Having done that and without saying another word, I gently start to push against him. Automatically, without any instruction, he always begins to push back. People shove when you shove them. Similarly, when you argue with someone, it automatically makes him or her want to argue back.

    The other great thing about Feel, Felt, Found is that it gives you time to think. Sometimes something will come up in a negotiation that you weren’t expecting. You haven’t heard anything like this before. It shocks you. You don’t know what to say; but if you have Feel, Felt, Found in the back of your mind, you can say, “I understand exactly how you feel about that. Many other people have felt exactly the same way. However, I have always found . . .” By the time you get there, you’ll have thought of something to say. Similarly, you sometimes catch other people at a bad moment. You may be a salesperson who is calling to get an appointment and the person says to you, “I don’t have any more time to waste talking to some lying scum-sucking salesperson.” You calmly say, “I understand exactly how you feel about that. Many other people have felt exactly the same way. However . . .” By the time you get there you will have recovered your composure and will know exactly what to say.

    Key points to remember:

    Don’t argue with people in the early stages of the negotiation because it creates confrontation.

    Use the Feel, Felt, Found formula to turn the hostility around.

    Having Feel, Felt, Found in the back of your mind gives you time to think when the other side throws some unexpected hostility your way.

    Roger Dawson
    Founder of the Power Negotiating Institute
    800-932-9766
    RogDawson@aol.com
    http://www.rdawson.com

    Roger Dawson is the author of two of Nightingale-Conant’s best selling audiocassette programs, Secrets of Power Negotiating and Secrets of Power Negotiating for Salespeople. This article is excerpted in part from Roger Dawson’s new book – “Secrets of Power Negotiating”, published by Career Press and on sale in bookstores everywhere for $24.99.

    Thanks To : Store Amazon2 http://networkstoragetetreau.co.cc/ http://nisxhixmoxtox4.blogdetik.com/ http://espresso.diggyblog.com/


  • Jan 28

    When you negotiate to what degree should you disclose what you hope to receive from the negotiation and how should you go about revealing your desires? The answer to a great extent depends on the type of person you’re negotiating with and the perception you wish them to perceive of you.

    It’s very important that you understand the negotiation style of the person you’re negotiating with, because that will be a determining factor as to how you should project yourself. The following are 3 styles of negotiators and insight into how you could negotiate with each style.

    The strong, no nonsense, bottom line negotiator …

    When negotiating with someone that is dogmatic, stubborn, tough, and very bottom line oriented, it may serve you well to state the desires you have of the negotiation in an approximate matter. That’s to say, in describing the outcome you wish of the negotiation, inflate it with ‘give backs’ concealed in your desires. ‘Give backs’ are negotiation positions, or points of view, you can use to move your negotiation partner in the direction you’d like to have the negotiation proceed. In essence, you can use ‘give backs’ to make concessions as you go through the negotiation to build rapport, or receive concessions you’d like the other person to make.

    The reason you should inflate your desires is directly related to the demeanor of this type of negotiator. More than likely, someone that has the traits of a very dogmatic or tough negotiator will try to get as many concessions from you as he can.

    The amiable, less dogmatic negotiator …

    When negotiating with someone that is less dogmatic, someone that is more amiable, you can be more exact in what you want from the negotiation, but still have some ‘give backs’ on reserve to make this type of negotiator happy with the process of the negotiation. The type of individual that will possess an amiable style of negotiation will be less likely to exhaust the ‘give and take’ process as you negotiate. This style of negotiator will enjoy the negotiation process as long as the negotiation doesn’t get too challenging. Nevertheless, you still have to be engaging to the degree that you’re not perceived as being overbearing or too weak to negotiate with this person. Be very ‘even handed’ with this type of negotiator and make sure you’re perceived as doing so.

    The passive or meek negotiator …

    When negotiating with a passive or meek negotiator, do not be overbearing. Don’t allow your actions to be perceived as being pushy. Let this type of negotiator perceive himself as being in control of the negotiation. As in all negotiations, you can observe the person’s body language to gain insight into the way you’re being perceived, but pay extra attention to this person’s body language, because you’ll be able to read their body language more succinctly.

    If you’re being perceived as too pushy, dogmatic, or overbearing, you’ll run the risk of alienating the person that uses this style of negotiation and the consequences could be the loss of the deal.

    Project the image of being gentle and somewhat meek with this type of negotiator. Don’t raise your voice, or make wild gestures during the negotiation. To the degree you can project the perception that they are in control of the negotiation, do so. You’ll be able to get a lot more out of the negotiation by being ’soft’ with someone displaying this style of negotiation, than you could if you played the role of the ‘tough guy’.

    When negotiating, always consider the characteristics, makeup, and overall negotiation style of the person with whom you’re negotiating and adjust your negotiation style accordingly. By doing so, you’ll be better synchronized with that person’s demeanor and style of negotiation, which should allow you to maneuver in a more expedient manner towards the goals of the negotiation … and everything will be right with the world.

    The Negotiation Lessons are …

    · Before sitting down to negotiate, determine how, when, and how much of your overall goal you’ll disclose for the negotiation. Part of that decision will be based on the type of person you’re negotiating with. To the degree that you understand the character and makeup of the person you’re negotiating with, you’ll have insight into how much they may assist you in reaching your goals.

    · When negotiating, always make your negotiation partner feel that he has ‘worked’ to obtain the outcome he received from the negotiation. Make him feel he’s ‘earned’ the outcome. If you make the negotiation and its outcome too easy, he’ll wonder if he could have done better, which could lead to having the negotiation reopened.

    · When negotiating, determine how much, or how little pressure should be brought to bear on a situation. Be cognizant of the reaction you receive when making offers and counteroffers and be prepared to adjust them according to the plans you’ve made for the outcome of the negotiation. Don’t be ‘heavy handed’ when a ‘light touch’ could suffice.

    Greg Williams – The Master Negotiator

    http://www.TheMasterNegotiator.com

    [http://www.YourEmergingSmallBusiness.com]

    Friends Link : Bargainnews Conwy