Conflict Management and Negotiation Critical Thinking - Essay Example

? Conflict Management and Negotiation Critical Thinking Lecturer: Integration involves an active pursuit for evidence inrelation to facts and interests. Pursuit for evidence is primarily motivated by an inclination to bargain for mutually satisfactory settlements between the warring parties. More so, it is usually essential for crafting high quality settlements in conflicts. Thus, to avoid win-lose endings, and or standoffs, it is important to have adequate knowledge on factors that relate to, and support, integration. Accordingly, the soundest argument is surrounded in a threefold set of factors relating to individuals’ inclination to integrate. These factors indicates that, the degree of integration differs, that the deviation can be clarified by individual dissimilarities, (situational dissimilarities, and to some extent through group dissimilarities and lastly, integration envisages high quality endings in conflicts. In addition, these factors ties integration to several predictors i.e. group differences, situational differences, and individual differences, and equally to several types of endings such as unbiased and professed result measures. As such, the objective of this paper is to survey the integrative approach to resolve a conflict between peter and Catherine Smith and The Midwestern: Contemporary Art museum (MCA). Integration In the modern world, handling of conflicts constructively is one of the paramount challenges. Even with maturing humanities, technology and scientific knowledge understanding, not to mention a more educated population, damaging conflicts are still prevalent. When conflicts intensify, the parties reach impasses, and gradually end up hurting each other in the conflict progression. This may lead to psychological problems, personal relations break down and group fights. Nevertheless, even with such adverse effects, conflict management academics still hold that many conflicts are potential to integrative resolution means. As such, parties can reach a mutual satisfactory settlement if they determinedly search for it. In order to handle conflicts constructively, the conflicting parties must be willing undertake an integrative approach. Hence, they must look for evidence in relation to facts and interests. Accordingly, they should be able to creatively exploit that information to breed mutually satisfactory settlements ( Druckman & Diehl, 206). As a consequence, integration is a significant concept in the conflict management methodologies. It is used in relation to numerous features of the conflict management practice such as integrative potential, integrative outcome, integrative procedure and integrative purpose conduct and helps both parties to arrive at a win-win situation. Case Facts In the case at hand Peter Smith and his wife Catherine Smith became involved in contemporary art in the 1970s. Subsequently, Peter was invited to become a member of the MCA board of trustees which he agreed to and was prepared to donate more money to the $10000 the organization had earlier requested. In 1989, Peter was elected as the chairman of the board. On the other hand, Keith Schmidt was hired by the board to hold the post of executive director at the start of the same year and this was because of his wide knowledge on matters related to museum management. However, these two executives were in constant conflicts mainly in regards to expansion and fund management. Peter was more conservative especially when it came to expansion while Keith was objected towards growth and he viewed Peter as a barrier. The peak of their conflict reached in November 1991 when the board chose to vote for Schmidt’s projects to rapidly expand the MCA against Peter opinion. After this eventuality, Peter and Catherine disappeared from the Chicago art community. In 1997 MCA was under the leadership of Peggy Fischer as the chairperson of the board while Schmidt was still the executive director of MCA. It came to the realization that MCA was under financial constraint since it depended heavily on donation from members, subsequently, Peter and Catherine had pledged $5 million which they had not paid from the time they vanished from Chicago art scene. The board is divided on how to compel Peter to honor his pledge to avoid bankruptcy, some member want to proceed the legal route while others want to negotiate with the Smith to reach an out of court agreement. As the chairperson of the board, I am expected to handle the negotiations. In addition it has come to the attention of the board that Peter is suffering from terminal cancer which requires a series of chemotherapy treatments. Decisions Having been able to reach the Smiths, there are a number of goals that I have set for the original negotiation. These goals are, creating reconciliation between the MCA community and the Smiths, convincing the Smith the urgency of the matter at hand, getting the full amount pledged by the Smith’s and reveling the boards expectations and stand. Further, this negotiation calls for ‘Best Alternative To No Agreement (BANTA)’ approach ( NegotiationBoard.com , 2009). Considering the circumstance that lead to the forfeiture of the pledge by the Smith, it is important to arm one-self with alternatives in case the negotiation is not conclusive. Under the BANTA approach, there are four major points to consider such as, the reality facing both parties at negotiation table, the subjective perception of both parties, the action taken at the negotiation table for the aim of shaping the perception, and lastly, the course of action the parties will approach if the fail to reach a common agreement. In this case the only available alternative is proceeding with a legal suit ( Camp Negotiation Institute, 2012). It is very important for a negotiation to distinguish itself personal interests and positions. This helps he negotiators to remain objected towards their goals thus reaching an agreement (Fisher & Shapiro, 2005). As has been earlier demonstrated in the facts in this case, I have never had any directs grievances with the Smith’s as such My personal interest in this negotiation is to convince them to forget the past and rejoin MCA fraternity. More so I would persona like he Smith’s to honor their pledge without attracting a legal suit because it will not only be a battle between the organization but it will equally drag my name into the legal battle and this may tarnish my reputation. Further, to attain a mutual stand in a negotiation there are four key principles that should be observed. These principles are; focusing on the interest rather than the position, Major to separate the parties from the problem, Invent options for mutual gain, and lastly, Contend on using objective criteria on which to base the bargain (Fisher, Ury, W., & Patton, B., 1991). Therefore, if these principles are observed to the latter a mutual understanding will be arrived at. It is important to engage in a negotiation without being overly contentious or personal as this may hurt the reputation of the negotiator or hurt their future business dealings (Jing, Shaw, & Scott, 2012). In the Smith’s case, there is a conflict or management. The organization has not placed definite roles for its managers hence the conflict between Peter and Keith. Lack of defined roles in any organization may result to any party feeling undermined (Thomas, 2013). Therefore, MCA should have advice its chief executive that it was the role of the board to micromanage him since his pivotal role is the develop strategies and proposals for the organization and that they are subject to acceptance rejection. However, the board should not undermine the role of the executive director as this will create a conflict ( Zev J., 2011). They should evaluate the proposals and recommend changes rather than dismiss it in total. Conflict management requires numerous tactics to resolve. Scholars have advanced a number of psychological tactics to be used by negotiator s so as they can arrive at win- win situation. These tactics are very essential in this case while negotiating with the smiths and they include, Diminishing Marginal Losses and Gains, Loss Aversion, Escalation of Commitment, Status Quo Bias, Irrational Reciprocity (Responding to the Extreme Demand), and Reference Point Effects (Hazeldine, 2006). Moreover, the use of ingratiation tactics will be highest in relationships with an imbalance of power, where the influencer is in the weaker position, rationality tactics will be highest in relationships with unbalanced, high intensity power, use of coalition tactics will be highest in relationships with unbalanced, low intensity power, use of exchange tactics will be highest in relationships with balanced, high intensity power, use of assertiveness tactics will be highest in relationships with stable high intensity command and the use of upward appeal tactics will be highest in relationships with stable, low intensity power (Gosselin, 2007). These tactics are very practicable in the Smith’s case because the biggest aim is to create reconciliation with them and the MCA communities in addition to making them realize the importance of honoring their pledge. As previously identified, power is a significant element affecting personal choice of influence tactics. A number of empirical researches have been advanced to demonstrate that negotiators in a position of power are able to effectively exert effect in addition to achieving the desired changes in another individual’s actions or behaviors ( Jeong, 2009). These individuals often achieve these changes by using tactics that reflect their greater power, for instance, assertiveness tactics or tactics that require power in the association. What is fairly less spontaneous is the part played by power in defining choice of influence tactics in negotiations where power is deranged and the individual in the weaker position is struggling to apply influence ( De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 2002). In the Smith case I intend to insist on a possible legal approach thus creating an assumption that will force them realize that the best alternative is to pay their pledge. More so, I will have to demonstrate to Peter the negativity of taking the legal aspect as it will be humiliating to his personality. Catherine should also be made to understand the psychological effect on her ailing husband if the case is taken to court ( Stewart & Lowe, 2012). Lastly, as the chairperson of the board and the chief negotiator, I would request the help of likeminded board members such as Lee, Stuart and Steiner so that they can mediate on the negotiation with the smith. However, it is also advisable to include consult with the lawyers for MCA so that a clear definition of a legal course can be understood clearly (HumanMetrics Inc, 2012). This will go in hand with the power influence hence spelling the outcomes of non-compliance by the Smith’s. As had been highlighted earlier, the main aim of this negotiation is to avoid a legal suit and reach an out of court agreement. To achieve this, the power influence has to be cleverly applied. Power influence can be damaging and it may result to the Smith’s failing to pay, resulting to a legal suit which will be expensive and time consuming. Conclusion Conflict management is a very important aspect to resolve grievances and it should be employed with great care. The negotiators should be able to understand the nature of the conflict as well as understand their positions (THOMAS, 1992). Further, the negotiator should be able to apply relevant tactics that will ensure that the settlement is a win- win situation. In this case it is a moral obligation for the Smith’s to honor their pledge; however, MCA should also demonstrate a will to reconcile so that the Smiths can pay up without being forced to do so. More importantly, if the case goes to the courts there may emerge unfruitful eventuality such a scaring off potential and willing future donors. References Camp Negotiation Institute. ( 2012, October 1). Negotiating under the light of a strong, weak, objective, subjective, and evolving BATNA – Deconstructing the BATNA myth part 2. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from Master the Secret World of Systematic Negotiation: http://www.campnegotiationinstitute.com/2012/10/batna/ De Dreu, C., & Van de Vliert, E. (2002). Using Conflict in Organizations. London: Sage. Druckman, D., & Diehl, P. (206). Conflict resolution, Volume 1. North Park, Newcastle: Sage. Jeong, H.-W. (2009). Conflict Management and Resolution: An Introduction. London: Routledge. NegotiationBoard.com . ( 2009). Identifying Your BATNA: Negotiation Preparation Part IV. Retrieved April 12, 2013, from Negotiation Board: http://negotiationboard.com/identifying-your-batna-negotiation-preparation-part-iv/ Stewart , I., & Lowe, S. (2012). Get in Their Head:Psychological In?uence Tactics in Negotiation. Litigation Management, Issue 1, 60. Zev J., E. (2011). Hunting The Devil In The Details: Form-Adhesive Contracts & Dispute Resolution In Organizations. New York. Fisher, R., & Shapiro, D. (2005). Beyond Reason: Using emotions as you negotiate. New York: Viking. Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin Books. Gosselin, T. (2007). Practical Negotiating: Tools, Tactics & Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Hazeldine, S. (2006). Bare Knuckle Negotiating: Knockout Negotiation Tactics They Won't Teach You at Business School. Appleton, Wisconsin: Cabal Group Limited. HumanMetrics Inc. (2012). Conflict Management Techniques. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from Personlity Explorer: http://www.personalityexplorer.com/FREEResources/ConflictManagementTechniques.aspx Jing, Z., Shaw, J., & Scott, K. (2012). A Contingency Model Of Conflict And Team Effectiveness. New York. THOMAS, K. (1992). Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update. Journal of Organizational Behavior;Issue 13, Volume3 , 256. Thomas, K. (2013). Conflict and negotiation processes in organizations. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 3 (2nd ed.), 651-717. Read More