Conflict Management and Negotiation - Essay Example

? Conflict Management and Negotiation Question 2# Two executive members of different s set up a meeting where they had a business deal to accomplish. One of them was Peter, the Chief Executive of Nike, a company that is currently experiencing financial hitch. Peter, son to the firm’s founder, had a deep commitment to preserve the family’s legacy. The second individual was Mike, an aggressive leader of General Cinema, the largest conglomerate probing for a corporate foothold in the publishing industry. Mike had the responsibility of a suitor with details on the financial strengths and good reputation of General Cinema, while Peter’s team was also optimistic of the success of the deal, and acted the listening role. Peter had expressed his intensions of being interested and not noncommittal. In the course of Mike’s presentation, Peter interrupted (an action that left witnesses silenced). Peter then signaled all the witnesses as explained that his actions was a sign of expressing his sincere belief that General Cinema was able to purchase Nike Company. This admission was classified as risky, since both Peter and Mike were aware of the deal. The two executives could have used the strategy of five basic bargaining style; competitors, problem solvers, compromisers, accommodators, and conflict evaders (Arthur F. G., 2003). By involving personnel of no individual interest in a deal, positive results have been obtained in the bargaining process. However, negative results are true in case of persons with personal and not organizational interests are involved. Justification here is that personal interests always override organizational interest during the bargaining process (Charles B. C., 2010). References Arthur F. G. (2003). The Attorney’s Duty in Reporting Professional Misconduct: A Roadmap to Reform. Charles B. C. (2010). Teaching Negotiation Ethics, AALS Annual Meeting. Question 3# In a situation where “A” has power over “B” to the extent that “A” can get “B” to perform a task, an authority that “B” would not be able to pass. Successful exchange can be ensured in such a situation by creating parity in power. Within a negotiation context, parity of power is considered as the perception by a party that the other side can counter any kind of power with a similar/ different form of power; thus rendering the further escalation of power ineffective. According to Bar-Siman-Tov, Yaacov (Ed.) (2004), authority is a formal power one acquires because of the position that they possess in an organization/ company. In any institutions there have to be rules, regulations and ethics considerations to guide and control how workers should conduct themselves towards each other and their clients. This therefore means that parity should be ensured among workers for the purposes of individual and the organizational integrity (Aureli F. and Frans B. M. de Waal, eds. 2000). References Aureli F. and Frans B. M. de Waal, eds. (2000). Natural Conflict Resolution. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA Bar-Siman-Tov, Yaacov (Ed.) (2004). From Conflict Resolution to Reconciliation. Oxford University Press Question 4# Company A wished to outsource services from another company rather than employing their own. After tendering for the job by over 10 companies, the tender committee of company A headed by the founder decided to settle for Company X since it belonged to the founder’s nephew, despite the proof by other committee members that it was less competitive as compared to the rest. If no blood relations were put into considerations, company B that demonstrated the most preferred work track could have been selected; and hence quality services could have been provided (Lee, K. & Ashton, M. C., 2004). The tender committee does provide opportunities to organizations that sufficiently meet their preset expectations with regards to either goods or services to be provided to the Company. Following the merits, Company X was not worth the opportunity since it was ranked last in terms of compliance success to the set requirements so as to be rewarded the tender opportunity (Tobin R.M., Graziano W.G., Vanman E., & Tassinary L., 2000). References Lee, K. & Ashton, M. C. (2004). "The HEXACO Personality Inventory: A new measure of the major dimensions of personality". Multivariate Behavioral Research 39. Tobin R.M., Graziano W.G., Vanman E., & Tassinary L. (2000). "Personality, emotional experience, and efforts to control emotions". Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 79: 656–669. Question 5# Within the business world, conflicts may be as a result of terms of sale/ differences in the personalities/ work styles. In such situations, conflict resolution requires involving a third party to further the communication process between the disputants, seeking solutions, and initiating an acceptable agreement for both parties. Success in conflict resolutions are only expressed by a win-win solution, as the resolution that mutually meets the expectations of all who are involved in the process (Turner. S. and Weed. F., 1983). Poor communications definitely lead to no better outcomes in case proper consensus are not met by either of the parties involved. As solution in case of no agreement a negotiator with a full understanding of the motives of both parties can be introduced. He/ she will have to talk to both parties separately to understand their expectations and mediate for a permanent and favorable solution for both parties as pertaining to their miss communications in the deal at hand (De Angelis P., 2007). References Turner S. and Weed F. (1983). Conflict in Organizations, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs NJ. De Angelis P. (2007). To Recognize and Deal with Passive-Aggressive Leadership in the Workplace, (Kindle Edition - Jun 22, 2008) Question 6# Jane was an operations manager of company A and she had recommended and assigned company B, run by her elder sister to conduct interview exercises for individuals who were interested in working in company A. Fortunately one of the applicants was their younger brother who was recommended for the position without going through the practical evaluations that were to follow oral interviews in which he performed fairly good. In any negotiation, trust promotes negotiation by making it more interactive and producing good outcomes; a good reputation has the ability to enhance one’s ability to be recommendable since reputation has already created a very positive expectations in the observant party - in this case the interviewers- (The International Who's Who, 2004). In the negotiation process, justice can take the form of distributive justice, procedural justice, interactional justice and systemic justice. If not for the case of ensuring things are fair, negotiation exchanges only emphasize conflicts between actors (Roy J.L., Bruce B., & David M.S., 2002). References The International Who's Who 2004. Europa Publications. 2003. p. 624. Roy J.L., Bruce B., & David M.S. (2002). Essentials of Negotiation Question 7# Cross cultural negotiation is treated differently by both Hofstede and Schwartz. According to Hofstede, there are five dimensions of culture i.e. power/ distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty/ avoidance index, and long-term orientation. Under these dimensions, the explanation Hofstede holds are that cultural norms are crucial in the mechanism and interpersonal relationships that exist within work places (Hofstede G., 1984). According to Schwartz S. H. (1990), the individualism-collectivism dichotomy has overridden on the benefits of larger popularity in cross-cultural psychology and obscuring crucial variations among values associated with it. However, he cites some criticisms against this because of; possible existence of individualism and collectivism, omission of values that serve common goals, and a presentation of popular opposition. In response to this Schwartz illustrates that cultural values have the possibility of being accounted for by the basic values of conservation, hierarchy, intellectual autonomy, affective autonomy, competency, harmony, and egalitarian compromise within the human society. These factors have to be therefore considered to make decision of the negotiation processes. References Hofstede G. (1984). Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Schwartz, S. H. (1990). Individualism-collectivism: Critique and proposed refinements. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 139-157. Question 8# Among the five patterns that may result when engaging in a conflict or negotiation situations, contending is characterized as the most difficult to use pattern during the negotiations process. Contention (also known as positional bargaining) is an idea that seeks to persuade the other party to accept a situation that literally favors one’s individual interest (Wilmot, W. & Jouyce H., 2007). This strategy involves inflated demands, irrevocable commitments, persuasions, and threats as opposed to healthy communications for the purpose of reaching an understanding with the benefit of both parties involved. Basing on its techniques, it may escalate conflicts after yielding poor results. Never the less, for a situation where an outcome is achieved, they may be of low-level compromises. To incorporate the skills so as to build an effective negotiation toolkit, a negotiator has to actively take into consideration the requirements of both sides of the parties involved in talks held separately. The requirements have then to be weighed to reach a conclusive point of whether some transactions can take place between the parties of not (Dean Pruitt, 1991). References Dean P. (1991). "Strategic Choice in Negotiation," in Negotiation Theory and Practice, eds. J. William B. and Jeffery Z. R., Cambridge: The Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, 1991, pp.27-46. Wilmot, W. & Jouyce Hocker. (2007). Interpersonal conflict. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies. Read More