A. Capital planning and priority-setting all tend to require that people reach agreement from different points of view. Interest-based negotiation techniques can help us focus our energy on the process, and guide that process toward a satisfactory result. By following these common-sense rules, we can turn conflict into cooperation, and reach solutions that work for everyone.
B. If we view the problem as that which needs to be resolved rather than viewing someone holding a contrary viewpoint as a person to be defeated, the odds of a successful collaboration increase. Try changing the shape of the table rather than sitting opposite your ‘opponents’. Arrange the seating so that all the parties are sitting together facing a flip chart or blackboard where the problem is presented. That makes it clear that all the participants are facing the problem together - that instead of it being ‘us’ against ‘them’, it is a case of ‘all of us’ against ‘it’.
C. Two sisters are fighting over the only orange in the family larder. Each sister must have the entire orange for herself; any less is impossible. A wise parent asks each of the girls (in private) why she wants the orange. One explains she wants to drink the juice; the other wants to use the rind to cook a pudding. What each sister wants is her position; why she wants it is her interest. In this case, the simple solution is to give the rind to the cook after the juice has been squeezed for the thirsty sister, thus meeting the interests of both. When preparing for a negotiation, or after it has begun, don’t just ask, ‘What do they want?’ It is also important to ask, ‘Why do they want it?’ It is equally important - but often more difficult - to ask the same questions about your own views. Many successful negotiators find they’re more successful if they focus on understanding their interests as they enter discussions. If they haven’t started out with a perfect package, the ideas of others may actually improve their final result. Negotiators who arrive with a complete package can create real problems. They may take personally and stubbornly resist any modifications to their ideas, making it more difficult to reach a satisfactory resolution.
D. If you do not reach an agreement with the other party, does that really make things worse for you? When you’re selling an antique Rolls Royce and have received an offer of $43,250, you know what another potential buyer has to do to get you interested. Of course, the first offerer may plan to use the car for chauffeuring wedding parties, while a second offerer collects and restores antique cars and preserves them indoors. Is more cash all you care about, or is it important to you that your cherished Rolls is properly cared for? Or do you want to turn down both offers and keep the car for now? In determining your BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement), a straightforward review of your interest will give you the clearest picture. If you accept your BATNA, you know when you can simply turn your back on the negotiations. But it is important not to ignore the other party’s BATNA. The relative strength of each party’s BATNA will determine the balance of power each can exercise.
E. If the other party is highly opinionated or emotional, if their approach is threatening or extremely demanding, keeping quiet after they finish speaking can be quite unsettling to them. Most people are troubled by silence in the midst of heated discussion. Sometimes silence is viewed as disapproval. But since no specific disapproval has been voiced, it cannot be treated as an attack. It has happened on many occasions that, when met with silence, people have modified their previous statements to make them more palatable.
F. If all the participants view the process as fair, they are more likely to take it seriously and ‘buy into’ its result. Moreover, the focus on fairness can have an important impact on the substantive result. If the parties to a negotiation can agree on standards against which elements of the agreement can be measured, it can give each a face saving reason for agreeing. Parties who walk away from the table grumbling may regret their commitment and only honor it grudgingly. If they end up looking for excuses to get out from under an unwanted result, the gains achieved by the other side may prove to be short-term indeed.
G. Keep a cool head and pay attention to the process and the strategy, as well as the substance of the negotiation. If it’s not your ‘turn’ to be angry, the exercise of restraint can be turned into a positive opportunity to observe what is going on with a clear eye. No less important, yelling at each other is not negotiation; it is confrontation. In those situations there may possibly be a ‘winner’, but it is even more likely there will be a ‘loser’.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Question Focus: Main idea question - asks for the overall focus of the whole passage
Correct Answer: D
Why this is correct: The passage repeatedly explains that successful negotiation comes from understanding interests, not just positions. The orange story and later advice all show how focusing on why people want something leads to better solutions.
Passage Reference: Capital planning and priority-setting all tend to require that people reach agreement from different points of view. Interest-based negotiation techniques can help us focus our energy on the process... Two sisters are fighting over the only orange... What each sister wants is her position; why she wants it is her interest.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'interest-based negotiation techniques' = Option: 'focusing negotiations on interests'
Tips: For title questions, look for ideas repeated across many parts of the passage, not just one paragraph.
Why the other options are wrong:
- A: Students may choose this because BATNA is explained in detail. However, BATNA is only one part of the passage, not the main theme. This is a Wrong section trap.
- B: Fairness is discussed, but only in one section. The passage is broader than fairness alone, so this is a Partial truth trap.
- C: The passage actually warns that arriving with a perfect package causes problems. This choice says the opposite, so it is a Contradiction trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- interest = the reason why you want something
- position = what you say you want
Question Focus: Detail question - asks what the passage says about starting negotiations
Correct Answer: A
Passage Reference: Many successful negotiators find they're more successful if they focus on understanding their interests as they enter discussions. If they haven't started out with a perfect package, the ideas of others may actually improve their final result. Negotiators who arrive with a complete package can create real problems.
Why this is correct: The passage says that negotiators often start with a package of ideas, even if it is not perfect. So beginning with a complete package of requirements fits the writer's description.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'started out with a perfect package' = Option: 'a complete package of requirements'
Tips: For detail questions, match the option to the exact wording of the passage, not what feels logical.
Why the other options are wrong:
- B: Having an open mind sounds good, but the passage never says this is the best way to start. This is a Not Given trap.
- C: Seating arrangements are mentioned, but not as the best way to start a negotiation. This is a Context shift trap.
- D: Understanding what you want and why is important, but the passage says problems happen when people refuse to change their package. This option over-focuses on one idea, so it is a Partial truth trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- negotiator = person who takes part in discussions
- package = set of ideas or demands
Question Focus: Purpose question - asks why BATNA is used
Correct Answer: C
Passage Reference: In determining your BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement)... If you accept your BATNA, you know when you can simply turn your back on the negotiations.
Why this is correct: The passage clearly says BATNA helps you know when to stop negotiating and walk away. That directly matches deciding when to end discussions.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'turn your back on the negotiations' = Option: 'decide when to stop the discussions'
Tips: When a question asks about purpose, look for phrases explaining what something helps you do.
Why the other options are wrong:
- A: Getting more from the other party is not stated as the purpose. This is a Causation trap.
- B: This option misunderstands the word interest and talks about bank accounts, which are irrelevant. This is a Paraphrase trap.
- D: The car example is only an illustration, not the purpose of BATNA. This is a Context shift trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- BATNA = best alternative choice
- negotiation = discussion to reach agreement
Question Focus: Detail question - asks about the effect of silence
Correct Answer: A
Passage Reference: If the other party is highly opinionated or emotional... keeping quiet after they finish speaking can be quite unsettling to them. Most people are troubled by silence in the midst of heated discussion.
Why this is correct: The passage says silence can make emotional or aggressive people feel unsettled, which means uncomfortable. That matches this option exactly.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'unsettling to them' = Option: 'make aggressive people uncomfortable'
Tips: Watch for words that describe feelings. IELTS often paraphrases emotions using simpler language.
Why the other options are wrong:
- B: Silence is not described as a threat. This is a Not Given trap.
- C: The passage focuses on the effect on the other party, not on calming yourself. This is a Context shift trap.
- D: Silence may be seen as disapproval, but the passage says it is not treated as an attack. This is a Partial truth trap.
Key Vocabulary:
- unsettling = making someone uncomfortable
- heated = angry or emotional
General Tips:
- MCQ questions follow passage order, so use the location of the last answer to find the next one faster.
- Do not choose answers that are true in real life unless the passage clearly supports them.
- For title questions, ignore examples and look for the repeated message across the whole text.
- Eliminate wrong options by spotting traps like partial truth and context shift.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation