The strategy of negotiation

The power move is appropriate when related parties have financial or social concerns to a deal and they show an inclination towards the settlement of an agreement and just want to get some additional benefits (Brams, 1994).
Sometimes, enforcing related party to take a decision is most appropriate because there is some hindrance in coming to a conclusion. A person can be asked to clear his dues accordingly threatening him that his already paid amount will be usurped (Brams, 1994).
The allies can be asked for support in coming close to an agreement in case of a negotiation. Internationally, a clash between two countries is usually settled because of involvement of allies from both parties that can be taken as an example. Allies are usually required when related parties are unable to settle the dispute themselves (Brams, 1994).
In multilateral negotiations, negotiator sometimes makes use of intransigence that is a powerful tool. However, this tool becomes dangerous because sometimes in resp0onse to intransigence, the other party also shows the same due to which, agreements are for short duration or are wholly rejected. Sometimes, related parties are pressurized to take willed decisions of the other party. Intransigence is used when there are no friendly relations between the parties. Intransigence is effective in a negotiation when a powerful party can take hold of the situation as per its own requirements (Ross & Stittinger, 1991). For example, an organization’s owner can make use of intransigence to make an affected employee come to an agreement forcefully.
Brams, S. J. (1994). Theory of moves. Cambridge University Press.
Ross, L., & Stittinger, C. (1991). Barriers to conflict resolution. Negotiation Journal, 7(4), 389-404.