Pam Albrights Negotiating Strategy for the First Upcoming Negotiation - Research Paper Example

Dr. Anne Siders, commissioner of Public Health at the Department Pam Albright March 6, Memorandum that summarizes Pam Albright’s negotiating strategy for the first upcoming (intra agency) negotiation As you asked, this memorandum has been compiled to outline negotiating strategy that will be used for the forthcoming intra agency negotiation. The memo outlines the background of the whole issue and it also highlights the key issues to be addressed. Background Research has shown that perinatal depression (depression during pregnancy and postpartum depression) occurs in approximately10 percent of pregnancies. This healthcare state is characterized by persistent symptoms including strong feelings of anxiety and despair. People who experience this problem often find themselves in difficulties of taking care of themselves as well as their children. However, for postpartum depression, the experts believe that the best time for screening is sometime between 4 and 8 weeks after birth. An opportunity for intervention is possible if checks are carried out within this period. The major problem is that women rarely attend this six week postpartum hence the need to negotiate for meaningful policies that can be implemented in order to deal with this seemingly simple but complicated problem that can lead to the death of the mother or the child. A good example can be drawn from the case of Shannon Green who fatally crashed her car when she fell asleep while on the wheel. Though people blamed her for negligence, it emerged that she suffered from perinatal depression. As such, research has shown that simple screening tools in identifying women with perinatal depression are very effective in dealing with this particular problem. Key issues, positions and interests The main issue here is that more funding should be provided in the public healthcare sector to cater for mothers with perinatal depression. Whilst the children are covered under the State Child Health Insurance Program (CHIPKIDS), if they are not insured, of great concern is the need to ensure that there is legislation in place which is specifically designed to ensure that there is use of evidence-based screening tools during and after pregnancy by key health care professionals. The issue of perinatal depression should not be taken lightly since it has serious repercussions on the people affected. As aptly shown in the case study, this healthcare problem affects the mother in various ways and it ultimately affects the child as well and this is the reason why special care ought to be taken when dealing with this particular issue. The other key issues related to negotiation include the following: REFERRAL AND TREATMENT: Development of effective referral systems that include identifying entry points as well as treatment alternatives so as to ensure that women at risk of perinatal depression receive treatment on time. RESOURCES AND TRAINING: Provide training to responsible healthcare personnel such as paediatricians, obstetricians and gynaecologists, nurse midwives, and other practitioners in identifying, diagnosing, treating this problem. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Develop guidelines and protocols for referrals where perinatal depression is suspected. CONFIDENTIALITY: Addressing privacy and reporting issues while ensuring the safety of the mother and child. FINANCING: Funding from State Medicaid and third party insurers for services related to screening and intervention for perinatal depression. OUTREACH: The other key issue is related to development of public awareness campaign for perinatal depression. Negotiation Strategy The major policy priorities/negotiation goals include the following: to ensure that there is adequate funding for referral and treatment for local health centers. The other goal for palm is to negotiate for legislation that encourages evidence based screening tools during and after pregnancy by key health professionals. There are likely to be some conflicts with the negotiation team which need to be resolved prior to engaging in the negotiation. For instance, Dr. Benjamin has a good relationship with the state AAP but is concerned about the aspect of placing more tasks on the paediatricians who already seem to be overburdened. Indeed, he may support the whole idea raised by Pam but he may want to exonerate the paediatricians from this particular task. On the other hand, it can be seen that Judith Stevens is self centred and may not easily buy the idea suggested by Pam. Pam should approach these people on a face to face basis prior to carrying out the negotiation so as to try to convince them to buy her ideas. It would be easier to negotiate with people when they have an idea about the subject matter. Pam should use the distributive bargaining strategy when she approaches these negotiations. This frame will put her on a position where she is able to create a win-lose situation in favour of the people with perinatal depression. The main tactic she will use in this particular case is to try to get the opponents to agree to her specific target point or to get the opponents as close to it as possible. She has to show that her target is fair compared to the opponents. Her major negotiating point is to convince the other parties on the need to secure funding for people with the identified problem. This is very important since it is designed to save the lives of people involved. However, some concessions may be made on legislation that encourages evidence based screening tools during and after pregnancy by key health professionals since other negotiators may argue that the piece of legislation will put a burden on people who are already carrying another heavy burden. This can help the negotiators to reach a consensus in this case. I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to work on this memorandum about the intra agency negotiations that will take place in the department of health. Yours sincerely Pam Albright In the event that I am Pam Albright, I would use the democratic participatory leadership style to approach this particular issue. Democratic, participatory leadership style is seen as more important when dealing with other people in decision making processes that affect the function of the organization (Robins & Odendaal, 186). This leadership style enhances performance of the other people involved in the decision making process since they are given the autonomy to contribute their ideas which can meaningfully shape the ultimate decisions made. It is the role of the leader to communicate the vision of the group and to lead the subordinates in the decision making process. If the other members of the group are given the opportunity to freely express their ideas, it becomes easier for the leader to reign or control their behaviour so that it can be directed towards the same goals and objectives. There is every reason to make sure that people belonging to a particular group are given the autonomy to make decisions in matters that affect their operations in the organization. I prefer this leadership style because it empowers the subordinates to make decisions that can shape the functions of the group in many ways. This style also helps the members of the group to develop a sense of belonging to it which can help them to identify with it. People who are happy to be part of the group are likely to put optimum performance in their tasks and this helps the group to be in a better position to achieve its desired goals. People who are treated as valuable assets in the group are productive and this helps them to contribute meaningful ideas that can shape the decisions made. Thus, involvement of other people in making important decisions is very important since they will also share the same vision of the group. Where there is mutual understanding among the members of the group, it can be seen that leading such a group of people would be quite easy as a result of the fact that there is mutual understanding that exists among the people involved. The conflict process style might need to be adapted if I were required to lead the first round of negotiations in place of Pam Albright. In managing conflicts, it can be seen that communication plays a pivotal role in dealing with the situation. Research has shown that semantic difficulties, insufficient exchange of information, and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to communication and potential antecedent conditions to conflicts (Robbins, 485). As such, I will first establish potential opposition or incompatibility since these conditions are responsible for causing conflicts if they are not properly managed. Conflicts usually emerge as a result of communication structure as well as personal variables such as individual value systems that differentiate the individuals. When the conflict has been recognised, action has to be taken in order to establish the root cause of the conflict. Once the conflict is felt, as the leader I will try to get to the bottom of the matter and identify the source of the perceived conflict. People’s intentions compel them to act in a certain way and this can lead to conflicts since their behaviour may not be compatible with the interests of the other people. When there is misunderstanding as a result of the fact that the people involved have different intentions, then there will be need to ensure that the bottom of the intentions that have led to a conflict is unearthed. It might be difficult to try to solve a particular conflict without knowing its cause hence the reason why I would take action to diagnose the situation so that I get to the crux of the issue. This also helps to find solution to the problem in a quicker and easy way. In order to deal with the primary conflict intentions, I will take into consideration the measures discussed below. In this case, the aim is to present my case in the best possible way that is likely to convince other negotiators about the need for funding of perinatal depression hence I will use the competing style. Indeed, I will be negotiating for a noble cause that is meant to save the lives of the people affected by this predicament. Since it is everyone’s responsibility to save lives, it is important to argue in favour of my ideas so that I can convince the other negotiating partners to buy them. Indeed, there may be no substitute for quality healthcare to all people since it is the responsibility of the government to ensure equitable health to all people. In this case, people who are not insured are severely impacted by the problem highlighted in the case study above. However, in the event that we have failed to reach consensus when negotiating for the envisaged policy change in the healthcare sector, then I can compromise my position but I will maintain the major points to be retained. I can only do this in order to facilitate progress in negotiations taking place. Whilst the solution that will be reached may not provide complete satisfaction to both parties involved, it paves way for progress towards the attainment of the desired goals. However, even if a compromised solution has been reached, I would still need to monitor the behaviour of the people involved so that we can remain on course. References Robbins, Stephen. Organisational behaviour: Concepts, controversies and applications.6th Edition. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1993, Print. Robins, Stephen & Odendaal Roodt. Organisational Behaviour, CT, Pearson Education, 2001, Print. Read More