Learning to Negotiate: What a Unit Taught Me About Strategy, Adaptability & Self-Awareness

Introduction

Before enrolling in Negotiation in Semester 1, 2025, I thought I had a reasonable idea of what was involved. I associated it with persuasion, compromise, and the ability to argue convincingly. What I did not expect was how deeply the unit would challenge my assumptions not only about negotiation as a skill, but about how I respond to conflict, uncertainty, and power in professional settings.

By the end of the semester, negotiation no longer felt like a technique to be mastered. Instead, it has become a practice, one that requires preparation, adaptability, ethical judgement, and, perhaps most importantly, self-awareness. This shift did not happen all at once; it unfolded deliberately through the structure of the unit and the experiences it demanded of me.

The Negotiation unit was built around the idea that ‘negotiation’ is learned best through practice. Drawing on the principles of the Harvard Negotiation Project, the unit emphasised experiential learning over passive absorption of theory. Workshops, role-play simulations, and reflexive assessment were not supplementary activities—they were central to how learning occurred. From the very beginning, it was clear that understanding negotiation would require me to actively engage, test ideas, and reflect on my own behaviour. That journey began with a strong focus on foundations.

Learning the Importance of Preparation

In the early weeks, the unit introduced core negotiation concepts such as positional versus interest-based negotiation, along with tools like Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), Worst Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (WATNA), Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA) and objective criteria. While these ideas were theoretically rich, they initially felt abstract. It was only when I encountered Negotiation Simulation 1, a two-party negotiation assessment, that their practical significance became clear.

For this task, I was required to prepare an individual negotiation strategy for a specific role, grounded in the theories we had studied. This meant clearly identifying my interests, alternatives, limits, and potential areas for agreement before entering the negotiation. I also had to participate in a filmed negotiation with a partner and work together to produce a written agreement reflecting the outcome.

What stood out to me was how exposed the process felt. The simulation was confronting because it revealed a clear gap between my intended strategies and my actual behaviour under pressure. Watching the recorded negotiation afterwards made this even clearer. I noticed moments where I reverted to positional thinking, instances where I missed opportunities to explore interests, and patterns in my communication style that I had never consciously recognised before.

This experience taught me a critical lesson early on: preparation is not about scripting outcomes, but it is about creating clarity and confidence that allow you to respond effectively in real time. At the same time, it became clear that even strong preparation has its limits, especially when negotiations become more complex.

Adapting to Complexity in Multi-Party Negotiation

Those limits were tested directly in Negotiation Simulation 2, a multiparty negotiation conducted later in the semester. Unlike the first simulation, this task involved multiple stakeholders, shifting alliances, and evolving information. Strategy could no longer be treated as a fixed plan; it had to remain flexible and responsive to changing dynamics.

In this simulation, I was assessed not only on my participation in the negotiation itself, but also on an individual written strategy and a set of post-negotiation reflection questions. These reflections required me to consider how my preparation actually assisted me, how I responded to unexpected developments, and what the experience revealed about the challenges of achieving consensus in real-world negotiations.

What I found most challenging was managing uncertainty. Information was incomplete, interests sometimes conflicted openly, and progress depended heavily on how well participants listened, communicated, and adapted. I became more aware of the role that emotion, power, and identity play in negotiation—factors that are often acknowledged in theory but fully understood only through experience.

This simulation fundamentally changed how I view effective negotiation. Success was no longer about securing the “best” outcome for my position, but about contributing constructively to a process that balanced competing interests while maintaining professional relationships.

Reflecting on my Identity as a Negotiator

While the simulations pushed me to act, the reflexive Journal required me to pause and examine how I was changing as a negotiator. Rather than summarising weekly content, the journal asked me to engage in reflexive practice, analysing how my assumptions, preferences, and personal style influenced my behaviour across the unit.

This distinction between reflective and reflexive thinking proved powerful. Instead of asking only what happened, I had to ask why it happened and what that revealed about me. Themes such as conflict management, communication style, adaptability, and ethical decision-making emerged naturally from my experiences in the workshops and simulations.

Through this process, I began to see negotiation as a mirror. It reflects not only our technical competence, but also our values, comfort with uncertainty, and approach to relationships. Writing the reflexive journal helped me connect theory to practice in a meaningful way and consider how these insights might shape my future professional interactions.

Learning Through Participation

Throughout the unit, workshop participation was treated as a core component of learning rather than a passive requirement. Being prepared, contributing to discussion, and actively practising negotiation skills were all assessed. This reinforced the idea that negotiation competence develops through repeated engagement, not observation.

Workshops became spaces where I could experiment with strategies, make mistakes, and learn from others. They also provided the raw material for reflection, allowing me to see how my thinking evolved over time. The more I participated, the more confident I became in applying negotiation concepts beyond the classroom.

Conclusion: More than a Skill

By the end of the semester, negotiation no longer felt like a discrete subject I had completed. It felt like a capability I had begun to develop. The progression from foundational theory to two-party negotiation, then to multiparty complexity and reflexive analysis, mirrored the realities of negotiation in professional life.

Most importantly, the unit taught me that effective negotiation is not just about reaching agreement. It is about understanding oneself, engaging ethically with others, and navigating complexity with intention and care. In that sense, the most valuable outcome of the unit was not a specific technique, in that sense, the most valuable outcome of the unit was not any single technique, but the deeper awareness I gained about who I am becoming as a negotiator and how I intend to practise this capability in the future.