Contents
Positional argument is never effective. 3
Positional negotiating endangers existing relationship. 4
Position bargaining in many parties involvement. 5
Separate people from problem.. 7
Introduction
Whether you like it or not, everyone is a negotiator in one way or the other in man’s life. Indeed negotiation is actually a fact and way of life. For instance, there exists a tight negotiation platform when two or more lawyers are trying to create a balance in a lawsuit from a vehicle accident. Town official meet to avert a prolonged strike. In this perspective, it is true that in daily activities, everyone is trying in every way to create a balance through negotiation in order to favor his or her own pursuit. In some other school of thought negotiation is believed as a basic way of securing something from others in a wise manner. This paper reflects an analysis of the book “Getting to Yes” by Ury and Fisher. In this classic book, Fisher and Ury reveals their four strategies that will oversee effective and efficient negotiation. Similarly, they demonstrate three frequent obstacles to the negotiation process, as well as discuss means to overcome the very obstacles.
Fisher and Ury, throughout this book, reveal that a satisfactory agreement is the one involving an efficient and wise process. In so doing, it improves the relationship of parties involved in the negotiation task. It is evident that wise agreements will always satisfy the interests of the parties in a fair and amicable process. Fisher and Ury’s key objective is to develop an essential method for deriving to a good agreement. Negotiations frequently take a unique shape of positional bargaining.
In any kind of this type of bargaining, each party involved is given the chance to open the discussion by taking their position in that specified issue. In this perspective, the parties involved will raise separate positional issues on the discussion, which is finally discussed at large to establish one position for all. Bargaining over a price is an example of such bargaining that is commonly used in daily purchasing activities.
Fisher and Ury feel that this form of bargaining (positional) does not always give rise to appreciable agreements. Therefore, to some extent, it is known to be an inefficient and defective means of deriving at agreements, since it is believed to neglect the interest of parties involved. It is also believed to create stubbornness, as well as harming the relationship of the parties involved in the negotiation process. A principled and upright negotiation offers a better and effective means of reaching a common satisfactory agreement.
Problem
The book, “Getting to Yes,” details the negotiation process. As described by authors, it is evident that individuals always negotiate daily over position. They argue that the key problem exhibited in most of the negotiations is that majority assumes that there exist hard or soft positions. They suggest that it is probable to be hard on a certain problem and be soft on the individuals, rather than being hard on both the problem and the people, or soft on both the problem and the people. This approach is collectively known as principled negotiation. Their main argument is that positional bargaining is counterproductive to an agreement that is wise. This does not really indicate that they will not arrive at a solution, or the same agreement arrived at is not amicable.
More often, pursuing a friendly and soft type of positional bargaining commonly results to one party getting vulnerable to the other party that plays hard. In any positional bargaining, the party that plays hard dominates over the soft party. When the soft party yields defeat to the party, which plays hard by accepting that defeat without applying more force against it, the negotiating game becomes biased as it favors that party which plays hard. Eventually, that negotiating process brings about a consent, which is deemed not to be prudent, since it proves to be advantageous to the bargainer, who plays hard as compared to the one who plays a soft positional bargain game. In addition, it is evident that if one of the parties gives a soft response when it succumbs to a hard positional bargaining, it is automatic that it loses its wares.
Perhaps these parties get to a win-win agreement where no one will lose. The problem is identified in the struggle for power equality of parliamentary positions between the female, and the male leaders. Below is an example of a debate between men and the women as they try to negotiate o division of power based on gender.
| Men (Boy students) | Females (Girl students) |
| The men deserve a higher number of seat in the constituency representation. | The women advocate for a fair amount of representation. |
| It has been a tradition that men should be leaders in comparison to women. | It should be noted that females are the highest in population, so only their identity and recognition should be guaranteed. |
| The position of women in certain roles tend to portray men inferior, thus that is impossible. | If we are not guaranteed the request that we have laid, we are boycotting the elections. |
| We are laying our negation call, whereby if we elect a woman to hold a superior post, she must have two male assistants. | We are for the notion that the positions should be attainable through merit and not gender sensitivity. |
Positional argument is never effective
It is clear that when negotiators get into positional negotiating they tend to forget all the interests of the parties in involved and lock in personal position bargain. The more one tries to make the other parties consider his /her position and defend the same, the more one becomes committed to the same, and that is where one’s ego is exposed.
A wise and amicable agreement resulting from a negotiation is marked by certain characteristics. It takes the interest of the community into consideration, efficient process, durable and fair resolution, and it meets legitimate wellbeing of the parties involved. Fisher and Ury assert that positions will actually divide each side of the parties involved into causes that are potentially intractable. On the other hand, interests can at least be complementary or shared. Therefore, establishing a common legitimate interest for parties involved will create unison for the parties. Exploring interests, mutually, will eventually create good results in time. Positional bargaining is believed to be exponentially complicated with more parties’ involvement. It is clear that, the more the parties involved in a negotiation process, the greater the chances of coming up with a mutual interest solution. It is evident that positional bargaining is only in a position to establish and utilize soft hard tactics. Interests’ exploration permits negotiators to be soft on people and hard on the problem.
Positional negotiating endangers existing relationship
It is evident that positional bargaining is a contest of willpower. Each party involved asserts what he/she wants to do and what he/she dislikes. The task of diverting one party to the wish of the other is a tasking battle. Each party tries its best to make the other party change its positional direction. “I will not give in” is a common phrase used in the mind of each party. Therefore, it is evident that positional bargaining will force and strain other parties in soot of one party, which may eventually lead to collapse of previously existing relationship of the involved parties. It is fatal to an extent that a commercial enterprise that initially used to work and do business together may part ways and shatter the company, in such a positional disagreement. Interestingly, from such a positional bargain neighbors may find it hard to continue communicating with each other, in believe that they are no longer friends but mere enemies as deduced by a negotiation. Bitter feelings that might have generated by such an episode may last for a very long time.
Position bargaining in many parties involvement
It is vivid that in any kind of a negotiation to occur there must be more than one party involved. Although it is believed that the more the number of parties or people involved in a negotiation, the stronger an agreement is deemed to be since there is a wide range is decisions derived from different people. However, in a positional bargaining this is hugely detrimental, the more the number of people involved in such a negotiation, the severe the drawbacks. If for instance, if around 160 countries are involved in a negotiation, as in UN conferences, setting up positional bargaining will be highly impossible since it may happen that all members say yes while only one says no.
Problem
Which game will you play? (Positional bargaining)
Soft Hard
Friendly participation Adversary participation
Agreement is the key goal Victory is the key goal
Establish concession to give relationship Demand for concession for relationship
Soft on both problem and people Hard on both people and problem
Trust for others Distrust for others
Transform position at ease Fight for position
Threats making Offer making
It is evident that in every form of positional bargaining, the hard game wins over the soft game.
Method
Fisher and Ury establish four basic principles of the process of negotiation. The four strategies are what they use to define, principle negotiation, which is eligible to be utilized effectively in any given kind of dispute. These include; separation of persons from given problem, interest focus and neglect of positions, establish options variety prior to any agreement settlement, and objective based agreement criteria (Fisher and Ury, P.11). It actually centers four strategies; interests, people, criteria and options.
The specified principles must be observed at all stages in order to create a win-win negotiation process, where every party involved is satisfied. The negotiation process essentially starts with the problem or situation analysis, analysis of the perceptions and interests of the parties and their existing alternatives. The next stage that follows is to establish a plan that will create options and means of responding to the problem analyzed and other parties involved. Finally, parties are called upon to discuss the analyzed and planned problem for solutions in order to arrive at one concrete solution of agreement between the parties.
Separate people from problem
It is evident that, in positional bargaining, person and position is usually intertwined tightly. The authors’ -Fisher and Ury- first strategy or rather principle is actually to separate persons from issues or problems. Individuals tend to turn personally concerned with the problems or issues, as well as their positions. Therefore, they seem to take quick responses to the positions and issues personal conflicts/attacks. Indeed, sorting out the persons from given problems or issues gives a room for the parties involved to deal with the issues keeping in mind of the sensitivity of their relationship not to break the same. Additionally, it also assists them to arrive to a clearer focus of the critical problem at hand.
Fisher and Ury reveal three main sorts of problems faced by people. First, there are perception differences among parties. Because peoples’ conflicts arise based on various facts interpretation, it is extremely vital for the parties to understand that and respect other parties’ viewpoint. It is from this that the parties ought to place themselves in the opponents’ position and not only at a personal level or interest. The parties must not simply tend to take or assume that their fears will be generated by their own action of considering other parties rather than their own interests. It must also be remembered that no blame game should exist on either side due to the parties’ action. Each side ought to try to make suggestive proposal, most probably the appealing ones to the parties involved. As mentioned earlier, it is believed that greater the number of parties involved in a negotiation, the greater the chances of them to be involved and make a wide range and concrete suggestion in favor to the outcome.
Second, emotions are argued to be another common source of persons’ problems. Just to retaliate, what the experts in the book feels negotiation can turn to be a intensely frustrating process. Individuals frequently react directly with anger or fear every time they feel or suspect that their own interest is at risk or threatened. The very first step that is essential in dealing and solving emotional issues is first to acknowledge the emotion issues, and then try to establish the possible sources, generating the emotions. Even if the emotions and arguments derived from the same may look unreasonable, the parties should acknowledge the present of the emotions. Dismissing certain parties’ feeling on the platform that they are unreasonable is likely to raise other frustrating and intense feeling, which may be extremely hard to resolve. In this perspective, it is truly wise to allow every party present its feelings. This in other words cautions that a certain party is not supposed to emotions through emotional out blasts. Sympathetic expressions and symbolic gestures like apologies can assist to calm tough emotions that may be developed
Communication is another third source problem as long people are concerned in a process of negotiation. In some cases, negotiators may be in a position that speaking to others becomes a challenging task, but might be grandstanding without their consent for their constituencies. The parties involved may be ignoring to listen to each other, and on the hand be submerged in planning for their personal responses. It may be also identified that the parties involved are talking to each other, as well as listening, but misunderstandings may happen. It is suggested that in order to handle these problems and other issues of concern, parties ought to utilize active listening. In this perspective parties, the listeners ought to render the speakers with full attention, maybe through a brief summary of the points raised by the speaker in order to confirm understanding of the same. It is very vital to remember that the same understanding, of what the speaker may be talking of, does not necessary mean an agreement of the same. Speakers ought to direct their subject matter towards the parties involved as well as establish keen focus on what they are in an effort to communicate. Every side ought to avoid attacking and/or blaming the other.
Generally, the ultimate and the best way to solve people problems and issues is by preventing the same from arising. These problems are less probable to emerge in case they have already established good relationship, and regard each other as a negotiation partner rather than placing themselves as advisories. After the same is significantly taken into consideration, the first principle will have no objection but be regarded as successful.
I found it very fascinating that Fisher and Ury demonstrate that “Ultimately… conflict lies… reality, but in accordance to people’s heads” (Fisher and Ury, 22). This reveals that it is more significant to handle the peoples’ truth perception other than dealing or trying to establish the real or actual truth. The key point generated tends to create a consensus that one should be keen to look and develop an understanding of the other parties’ perception concerning the world in a general look and then make another understanding, this time specific to the problem “put… in their own shoes” (Fisher and Ury, 23).
I actually find it difficult to believe that disregarding the facts of a scenario will help in any resolve problems or certain issues. Even if one makes somehow to meet the other parties’ interests in case they happen to be at perception-wise, one may be on the other side be risking negotiation breakdown. This generally implies that the most factual section of a problem can never be ignored at all. The truth will always assist identify the substantive and highly critical aspects of an issue or conflict. It is from the same that the truth can be utilized as a sole weapon to put persons into submission. However, when correctly exposed, truth may slice down the magnitude of a conflict. Personally, I feel that it is wise to establish whether the conflict arises since people are not willing to accept the submission facts of the problem or just misunderstanding of the same.
Fisher and Ury conclude the main discussion of the first strategy/principle by concentrating in establishing a concrete relationship with parties involved independently to save conflicts that may arise in the negotiation process. It is evident that working in a friendly team is remarkably simple and easy than working with strangers and enemies, powerful relationships will always lead to trust. The greater the level of trust within the parties, the stronger chances of solving issues and conflict amicably. In this perspective, I feel that the assessment ought to be kindly accepted in a negotiation process. It is true that even if bitterly issues were to arise among people who are in a good relationship, it is easy to solve the same easily other than dealing with an issue between enemies.
Interest Focus
It is evident that good and amicable agreements will always focus on the interests of all parties involved to their satisfactory rather than majoring on personal positions. Fisher and Ury reveal that “… position is … you have decided … Your interests … caused … to so decide.”(Fisher and Ury, p. 42) Generally, defining a certain problem in respect to positions reflect that one party will eventually “lose” the conflict. When a certain problem or issue is defined in respect to the parties’ interests, it is obviously possible to establish solution, which will ultimately satisfy the interest of the parties involved.
This can only be possible by being first in a position to identify the interests of the parties involved regarding the problem at hand. This can be established by promptly asking the reason why the party of concern holds such positions and why they neglect other possible and still reasonable position. Every party normally has various different interests entrenched within their positions and may consequently differ from the interest of the other parties involved. Nevertheless, every person will eventually share basic needs or interests, for instance economy and security well-being.
After the parties are in a position to identify their vital needs and interests, they should come to a common discussion for a common consensus. In case, one party is willing to seduce the other party to take or accept their submissions, that given party must exhaustively explain clearly their interests and why the take. The other party will then feel more motivated in case the party has revealed and taken a balance of both parties interests in the point view submission and some attentions has been created in both parties and not their own positions. Any kind of a discussion made should be centered at the anticipated solution and not taking so much time on the past events. On the same note, the parties involved must keep clear and precise focus on their own interest, but avoid being rigid to a certain position and proposal; therefore, they should be flexible.
The most intriguing part about interests is that there may be shared interests among the parties involved in a negotiation. It is also possible that, behind the marked position of the opposing parties, there will be common interests that may have not been taken into consideration. On the same note, some interests may be mutually or complementary inclusive. This means that they may be arrived at, both without affecting the other. For instance, David Camp Accord demonstrates the same exhaustively, whereby it is illustrated the way Israel wanted their position and peace to control and overtake Sinai Peninsula, of which they succeeded. On the other hand, Egypt desired power and independent over land and were so much geared to fight for it. The negotiation agreement calculated out between these two countries commissioned Israel to give back the peninsula sovereignty to Egypt taking into respect the agreement in the negotiation process that it would eventually be demilitarized area.
Many interests can be derived through asking various questions, in such a non-threatening means as “why not?” and “why?” regarding certain quoted positions. In this perspective, the point should be made clear that the purpose of asking such questions is to get a clear understanding regarding their position, and not gaining a justification. Actually, sharing one’s own interests may create an impulsion for the other party to open up. Taking an insight of human basic needs such as provision, security and relationship, then probe each of the areas mentioned a clear picture of interests for every party would emerge.
Taking an insight through the interests actually shows a willingness to realize the position of the other parties. This considers the position of the other party in a bid to find a solution. Fisher and Ury hearten a forward-look during the examination of the flexibility and interests in a manner that there can be satisfaction in those interests. The conclusion over this is mainly to be inflexible on the problem and be flexible on the people. In addition, there is no possible harm in becoming hard while talking on your interests if other people included in negotiation are uphold. This way of speaking through one’s own interests assists all parties notice together a variety of ways the interests, complement, are non-competitive or overlap.
Generate Options
Fisher and Ury establish four different obstacles to producing creative choices for working out a problem. The parties involved may decide hastily on a choice and in so doing fall short of considering substitutes or other choices. The concerned parties may perhaps be intent on tapering their choices to get the lone answer. These parties might describe the problem in terms of win-lose, presumptuous that merely the choices are for one side winning while other is losing. On the other hand, the party can possibly make a decision with the intention of the other side to establish a solution for the problem.
Moreover, Fisher and Ury propose four critical techniques to conquering these obstacles and coming up with creative choices. First, it is extremely vital to separate the evaluation stage from invention process. The parties ought to come together one voice of informal impression and then brainstorm in a discussion for all possible options to derive suitable solutions to the issue at hand. Essentially, creative and wild proposals are usually encouraged. On the other hand, the brainstorming episode can be made more productive and creative through frequently encouraging the parties involved to change into any of the four essential kinds of thinking: problem statement, problem analysis, general approach consideration, and action consideration. Through this kind of thinking, the parties will be able to structure the way that they will come up with a solution, thus avoiding conflicting situations.
The parties may make partial suggestions of the solutions to the issues and problem in question, many of which are taken into consideration as part of the solution-formulating process. After coming up with a variety of suggestions and proposals the group or the parties involved may have the chance to evaluate ideas to a common solution. The evaluation of ideas ought to start with the most essential and promising idea. Parties involved may improve and refine proposals and suggestions at this point.
Below is a circle chart showing the invention options:
Source: (author)
Parties can actually deviate from getting in a win-lose way of thinking through looking onto shared and common interests. In this kind of situation, there is always one party that loses out on the argument while the other wins the argument. In case the interest of the parties differs, they ought to seek other alternatives in which the outlined differences can be complemented or rather made to appear compatible. The main criteria to oversee reconciling process of the different interests arrived at is by looking for the items that seem to be of high benefit and of low cost, and the vice versa “(Fisher and Ury, 79).
Every party ought to make suggestions, as well as proposals, that are suitable and acceptable to all parties involved, in that the other parties will be at ease to agree to the decisions and proposals arrived at. To make this possible, it is significant to identify the target proposals and the decision makers. It is easy for legitimate proposals to be agreed to. On the other hand, threats are normally less efficient in motivating an agreement as opposed to beneficial offers.
Objective Criteria
Once the interests of the parties are openly opposed, parties ought to use objective criteria in order to make up and resolve their own differences. Subjectivity might lead to bias on one side, and may then lead to further conflict. By neglecting the objective criteria, the battle involving individual parties’ interest will eventually rise, thus, damaging the initially existing relationship. By so doing, the agreement will be defective and inefficient. It is true that decisions that are based on a reasonable platform make it cheap for these parties to preserve the relationship.
The initial procedure is to establish a wise objective criterion. Normally, there are usually numbers of various criteria, which can be used. The parties involved should come up with an agreement onto which criteria suits best their situation. The criteria ought to be both practical and legitimate. According to the scientific studies, legal precedents, and professional standards, there are various objective criteria sources. There is a highly precise means of testing for the criteria objectivity.
One of the simplest ways to test objectivity is through asking whether both sides would accept to get bound by the said standards. These standards are set from the principles governing the arguments from both sides. The parties might generate a reasonable procedure for resolving their disagreement rather than accepting in substantive criteria. For instance, children can fairly divide a cake among themselves by letting one child cut the cake, and then the others pick their piece.
Moreover, there are three key points to keep in mind during use of objective criteria. Initially, every issue ought to be approached as a common search for the objective criteria. Inquire for the logic behind suggestions of the other party. By means of the other parties’ logic to prop up one’s own position, this may be a very powerful way to negotiate. Next, every party should maintain an open mind throughout. They ought to be willing and reasonable to review their positions when need be. Lastly, as they must be reasonable and non-biased in the process, all negotiators should never admit to threats, pressure, or bribes. As the other party persistently declines to be reasonable, the initial party might shift the conversation from an investigation for substantive criteria into an investigation for procedural criteria.
Work Cited
Fisher, Roger and William Ury. Getting To Yes. 2nd Ed.” New York: Penguin Books, 1991 Print.
Get Professional Assignment Help Cheaply
Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?
Whichever your reason is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.
Why Choose Our Academic Writing Service?
- Plagiarism free papers
- Timely delivery
- Any deadline
- Skilled, Experienced Native English Writers
- Subject-relevant academic writer
- Adherence to paper instructions
- Ability to tackle bulk assignments
- Reasonable prices
- 24/7 Customer Support
- Get superb grades consistently
Online Academic Help With Different Subjects
Literature
Students barely have time to read. We got you! Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. You can get your literature paper custom-written for you by our literature specialists.
Finance
Do you struggle with finance? No need to torture yourself if finance is not your cup of tea. You can order your finance paper from our academic writing service and get 100% original work from competent finance experts.
Computer science
Computer science is a tough subject. Fortunately, our computer science experts are up to the match. No need to stress and have sleepless nights. Our academic writers will tackle all your computer science assignments and deliver them on time. Let us handle all your python, java, ruby, JavaScript, php , C+ assignments!
Psychology
While psychology may be an interesting subject, you may lack sufficient time to handle your assignments. Don’t despair; by using our academic writing service, you can be assured of perfect grades. Moreover, your grades will be consistent.
Engineering
Engineering is quite a demanding subject. Students face a lot of pressure and barely have enough time to do what they love to do. Our academic writing service got you covered! Our engineering specialists follow the paper instructions and ensure timely delivery of the paper.
Nursing
In the nursing course, you may have difficulties with literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, critical essays, and other assignments. Our nursing assignment writers will offer you professional nursing paper help at low prices.
Sociology
Truth be told, sociology papers can be quite exhausting. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. You can relax and have peace of mind as our academic writers handle your sociology assignment.
Business
We take pride in having some of the best business writers in the industry. Our business writers have a lot of experience in the field. They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper. They are able to handle business papers of any subject, length, deadline, and difficulty!
Statistics
We boast of having some of the most experienced statistics experts in the industry. Our statistics experts have diverse skills, expertise, and knowledge to handle any kind of assignment. They have access to all kinds of software to get your assignment done.
Law
Writing a law essay may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle, especially when you need to know the peculiarities of the legislative framework. Take advantage of our top-notch law specialists and get superb grades and 100% satisfaction.
What discipline/subjects do you deal in?
We have highlighted some of the most popular subjects we handle above. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. We deal in all academic disciplines since our writers are as diverse. They have been drawn from across all disciplines, and orders are assigned to those writers believed to be the best in the field. In a nutshell, there is no task we cannot handle; all you need to do is place your order with us. As long as your instructions are clear, just trust we shall deliver irrespective of the discipline.
Are your writers competent enough to handle my paper?
Our essay writers are graduates with bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. All our academic writers have a minimum of two years of academic writing. We have a stringent recruitment process to ensure that we get only the most competent essay writers in the industry. We also ensure that the writers are handsomely compensated for their value. The majority of our writers are native English speakers. As such, the fluency of language and grammar is impeccable.
What if I don’t like the paper?
There is a very low likelihood that you won’t like the paper.
Reasons being:
- When assigning your order, we match the paper’s discipline with the writer’s field/specialization. Since all our writers are graduates, we match the paper’s subject with the field the writer studied. For instance, if it’s a nursing paper, only a nursing graduate and writer will handle it. Furthermore, all our writers have academic writing experience and top-notch research skills.
- We have a quality assurance that reviews the paper before it gets to you. As such, we ensure that you get a paper that meets the required standard and will most definitely make the grade.
In the event that you don’t like your paper:
- The writer will revise the paper up to your pleasing. You have unlimited revisions. You simply need to highlight what specifically you don’t like about the paper, and the writer will make the amendments. The paper will be revised until you are satisfied. Revisions are free of charge
- We will have a different writer write the paper from scratch.
- Last resort, if the above does not work, we will refund your money.
Will the professor find out I didn’t write the paper myself?
Not at all. All papers are written from scratch. There is no way your tutor or instructor will realize that you did not write the paper yourself. In fact, we recommend using our assignment help services for consistent results.
What if the paper is plagiarized?
We check all papers for plagiarism before we submit them. We use powerful plagiarism checking software such as SafeAssign, LopesWrite, and Turnitin. We also upload the plagiarism report so that you can review it. We understand that plagiarism is academic suicide. We would not take the risk of submitting plagiarized work and jeopardize your academic journey. Furthermore, we do not sell or use prewritten papers, and each paper is written from scratch.
When will I get my paper?
You determine when you get the paper by setting the deadline when placing the order. All papers are delivered within the deadline. We are well aware that we operate in a time-sensitive industry. As such, we have laid out strategies to ensure that the client receives the paper on time and they never miss the deadline. We understand that papers that are submitted late have some points deducted. We do not want you to miss any points due to late submission. We work on beating deadlines by huge margins in order to ensure that you have ample time to review the paper before you submit it.
Will anyone find out that I used your services?
We have a privacy and confidentiality policy that guides our work. We NEVER share any customer information with third parties. Noone will ever know that you used our assignment help services. It’s only between you and us. We are bound by our policies to protect the customer’s identity and information. All your information, such as your names, phone number, email, order information, and so on, are protected. We have robust security systems that ensure that your data is protected. Hacking our systems is close to impossible, and it has never happened.
How our Assignment Help Service Works
1. Place an order
You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.
2. Pay for the order
Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.
3. Track the progress
You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.
4. Download the paper
The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!
