Undertaking a Successful Negotiation Process in a Labor Union Essay

Negotiation refers to the conversation between several parties with the aim of resolving their differences, reaching an understanding, gaining advantage, or designing outcomes that satisfy the interests of either party. Negotiation happens within government branches, businesses, and legal proceedings, non-profit organizations, and among nations. Drastic situations include personal situations like marriage, parenting, and divorce. The following study evaluates and describes the subject, theory and practice of negotiation (Fells, 2012). The essay takes considerable references to professional negotiators such as leverage buyout negotiators, union negotiators, hostage negotiators, peace negotiators, legislators, brokers, or diplomats.

Strategies

Negotiation takes various forms including trained negotiators acting for certain organizations or positions within formal settings and in informal negotiations such as between friends. Negotiation is contrasted through mediation for illustrations where neutral third parties listen to the arguments of each side and help in designing agreements between such parties. The action is comparable to arbitration, as it resembles legal proceedings. Arbitration involves both sides making arguments aimed at quantifying the merits of each case for the arbitrator deciding on the outcomes. Such negotiations are called hard-bargaining or positional negotiation (Guasco & Robinson, 2007). Theorists in negotiation distinguish between various types of negotiation. The application of negotiation takes different labels within generalized types as well as distinguished ways of presenting ideas.

Distributive Negotiation

Distributive negotiation is hard-bargaining or positional negotiation and aims at developing models of market haggling. Distributive negotiation from each side adopts extreme positions with knowledge of unacceptable outcomes as well as employed combinations of bluffing, risk-taking, and guile to cede prior reaching a deal. The distributive bargainers for the conception of negotiation based on processes of distributing and fixed value amount. The distributive perspective implies that a finite amount is divided or distributed among people's involvement (Garrett, 2005). This approach to negotiation refers to the distribution for fixed pie. There are elements that the proportions for distribution for variations involved. Distributive negotiation acts as win-lose due to the assumption for personal gains and results from other people's losses. Distributive negotiations do not involve people without previous interactive relationships.

Integrative Negotiation

Integrative negotiation is sometimes popularized as principled or interest-based negotiation. The context of negotiation involves sets of techniques for attempting to improve likelihood and quality of the negotiated agreement through the provision of alternatives to traditional techniques on distributive negotiation. Even as distributive negotiation assumes fixed value amount, to be shared among the parties, the approach to integrative negotiation attempts to generate value through the negotiation (Falcao, 2012). The context focuses on underlying interests for the parties as compared to arbitrary starting positions where approaches to negotiation are shared problems as compared to personalized battles. The individuals insist on adherence to main objective as well as principled criteria for the agreement basis. Integrative negotiation involves higher levels of trust used in forming relationships. It involves problem solving in creative ways aimed at achieving mutual gains and is sometimes termed as a 'win-win' negotiation (Fells, 2012).

Tactics

There are different approaches to categorization of essential negotiation elements. Three basic elements in the classification include process, behavior and substance (Benoliel, 2011). Behavior includes the relationships between the parties and communication styles adopted during negotiations. Substance means the parties' interest to negotiate for an agenda, issues (positions and interests), options, and agreement reached. The other perspective of negotiation comprises four elements: strategy, process, tools, and tactics. Strategy includes top-level goals that focus on relationships and outcomes (Garrett, 2005). The tools and processes include steps geared towards following roles taken within preparation and negotiation with various parties. Tactics in this case comprise of more detailed actions and statements as well as responses among actions and statements. Various parties aim at persuasion and influence through assertion of the integral elements as modern day success in negotiation.

Other forms of negotiations require different tactics. The distributive approach requires negotiators battle for largest possible share. It makes it appropriate between various limits of respect to other side like adversaries compared to partners taking harder lines. The context is less appropriate where the ideas were aimed at hammering out arrangements that suit the best interests of each side. Good agreements do not only focus on maximum profit, but also optimum gain. It also means that negotiators should not give up their advantage without any gain. Cooperative attitudes regularly pay, and the gains are not at expense of others (Starkey, Boyer & Wilkenfeld, 2010).

Skilled negotiators use various tactics that range from negotiation hypnosis all the way to straightforward demands presentation that include setting of preconditions.In other cases, deceptive approaches may include cherry picking. Salami and intimidation tactics are also included in swaying the negotiations' outcomes. The other tactic in negotiation is a good guy / bad guy approach. The tactic is favorable when negotiators act like bad guys and use threats and anger (Falcao, 2012). The alternative negotiator is a good guy and is relatively understanding and considerate. Good guys blame bad guys for the difficulties as they try to get agreement and concessions from the opponent.

Integrative Perspective Negotiation Taking

Perspective taking is helpful in several occasions that help self-centered negotiators in seeking mutually beneficial solutions. It also includes increment in likelihood for logrolling as well as favor traded for each other such as the quid pro quo. Social motivation increases the scope of the party conceding to negotiations (Guasco & Robinson, 2007). On the other hand, concession forms a mandatory component for negotiations while research illustrates that people conceding more quickly, are not likely to explore mutually beneficial and integrative solutions. In such cases, conceding lowers the chances of integrative negotiation (Starkey, Boyer & Wilkenfeld, 2010).

Negotiation Styles

There are various styles and responses to negotiation. The strategies are frequently described across literature where actions are based on dual-concern models. Dual concern conflict resolution models are perspectives assuming an individuals' preferred method to deal with certain conflicts based on themes such as assertiveness (concern for self) and empathy (concern for others). The model emphasizes that individuals continue balancing their concerns with personal interests and needs against others' needs and interests. The styles are based on preferences of individuals with respect to their pro-social or pro-self goals. The styles changes with time and individuals for having strong dispositions to numerous styles (Starkey, Boyer & Wilkenfeld, 2010).

For accommodative contexts, individuals enjoy solutions of problems of other parties and preservation of personal relationships. Accommodators have been sensitive for body language, verbal signals, and emotional states for other parties. However, they feel exploited for situations and other party places as well as for the relationship. For avoidance, individuals without preference of negotiating and do not attempt through unless warranted. Negotiations involving such avoiding elements focus on tending for deferring and dodging for confrontational negotiating aspects (Falcao, 2012). However, such individual support their perceptions through tactful and diplomatic techniques. In Collaboration, individuals enjoying negotiations involving solving of tough problems and creative ways are preferred. Collaborators prefer using negotiations as a way of understanding the interests and concerns of other parties. However, problems may arise through the transformation of simple situations to complex ones. In competitive scenarios, individuals enjoying negotiations are based on the presentation of opportunities of winning various items.

Competitive negotiators develop strong instincts based on various negotiation aspects and are normally strategic (Fells, 2012). The fact their approaches dominate bargaining processes, competitive negotiators neglect the relevance of relationships. In compromising, parties with eagerness of closing a deal through doing equal and fair actions in various parties involve the negotiation. In the end, compromisers are useful in limiting the time to completing the undertaking. However, compromisers unnecessarily rush negotiation processes and make quick concessions (Starkey, Boyer & Wilkenfeld, 2010).

Types of Negotiators

The major kinds of negotiators identified by researchers include soft bargainers, principled bargainers, and hard bargainers. Soft people perceive negotiation as close competition, and they choose gentle bargaining styles. The alternative offers include making progress based on best interests while yielding others' demands, avoiding confrontation and maintaining good relations with other negotiators. The perception of such friendships is inclusive of the goals of the agreement. Such individuals do not separate people from problems but are soft to each (Cleary, 2000).

Hard people utilize contentious strategies as a way of influencing. They use phrases like the 'final offer' and threats, as they are distrustful of others. Most of them insist on one position while applying undue pressure in negotiation. They perceive others as adversaries as well as ultimate goals of victory. They search for single answers while insisting on consent and agreement. They refrain from separating people from problems as they are hard on all people and problems involved (Mehnert, 2008).

Principled individuals bargain in ways that seek to achieve integrative solutions through sidestepping commitment to various positions. The critical focus includes focusing on the problem as compared to motives, needs, and intentions of individuals involved. The essence of separation involves people from such problems, exploring interests, avoiding bottom lines and reaching results through standards.....