Power Struggles

User Generated

Banzvffvba19

Writing

Rasmussen University

Description

Previous assignments attached

This section will focus on identifying the power differences between the two parties in the ongoing negotiation. In the situation between Nikki and Michelle there is a definite power differential between the two parties. Power can be derived from many sources. For this part of the project review the scenario fact pattern and address the following questions in your paper:

  1. Compare and contrast the power differential between the parties. Where does Nikki derive her source of power? Identify whether Michelle has a source of power.
  2. Create a list of how the party perceived to be in the "lesser power position" should prepare and proceed with the negotiation. Relate your list to the facts of this case.

In your paper, follow standard mechanics in grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Provide proper APA cited research: in text and full citations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Negotiation Tug of War for Advantages

Wouldn't it be nice if in every negotiation the parties held equal power? This would ensure that everyone is starting off on equal footing and that no one would have an advantage over the other party. More likely than not, this situation does not occur. In many a conflict or negotiation, one party derives or obtains more power over the other party. Parties achieve power from a variety of sources:

  • Informational sources of power
  • Personal sources of power
  • Power based on position in an organization
  • Relationship-based sources of power
  • Contextual sources of power

These sources of power are not necessarily a negative part of the negotiation or conflict process. Oftentimes, by identifying the source of power each party holds, they can use their powers to work together towards a resolution. A problem still remains when the power differential leaves one party with the feeling of not having a matched amount of power when dealing with the other party.

It can be rather intimidating to come to the negotiation table when you feel as though you have less, whether it is perceived or actual power, than the other party. For example, think about a time when you wanted to negotiate for something such as a bigger raise or more vacation time? Based on the fact that you are making the request to your boss, you are facing power based on position in an organization. You are the subordinate asking for more of something. By cultivating a strong BATNA such as having a legitimate job offer which would offer those things, you can balance the power.

As you have learned so far, one of the best ways to be successful in not only a power differential, but in your overall negotiation is to be prepared. Anytime you enter a negotiation, be sure to examine the power that you hold as well as the actual or perceived power of the other party or parties. While examining this power, remember to review tips pertaining to parties in the lower position.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ethical Win-Wins

Throughout your time in college, you studied the interrelatedness of ethics in a variety of situations. You learned that ethics are important so that the rules are fair for all involved. Imagine a workplace free of ethics? People would not be accountable for showing up, completing tasks, stealing company supplies, etc. As a manager, you need to make ethical decisions to ensure an equitable workplace for your subordinates.

When it comes to negotiations, we want to approach them in an ethical manner. In your materials for this week, you saw how power can be used in a negative or positive approach at the negotiation table. Sometimes the desire to assert more power over the other party leads down the path to unethical negotiations. A party will use tactics such as intentional misrepresentation, omission of vital facts, or intimidation to assert authority over the other party. Their goal is to force the other party to do what they want such as purchase a car or enter into an unfavorable contract.

Not all tactics are completely ethical versus unethical. Depending on how they are performed will render them as being ethical. Bluffing, which are insincere threats or promises, can be a means to see if the other party is really serious when it comes to the subject of the negotiation. For example, Party A is selling a car and tells Party B that they have another interested party coming to check out the car in a few hours. Party A does not have anyone else coming by to check out the car. The use of bluffing, or telling Party B that there is another interested party, is their way of measuring the interest level of Party B. Some may consider this bluff an all-out lie, while others consider it an ethical part of the negotiation process.

When using the tactics from the module resources, it is important to balance whether they are ethical or unethical. If both parties play fair, then the result of the negotiation typically results in a win-win. When one party asserts unethical tactics or unnecessary tactics in a negation, the power starts to become imbalanced resulting in a win-lose situation. One of the outcomes of a good negotiation is that regardless of the result, both parties feel as though they were active participants in an ethical process.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Running head: THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL The Conflict Gets Personal Bria Jones Rasmussen College September 3, 2019 1 THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL 2 The Conflict Gets Personal Question one There are several interests, rights and power related issues that are driving the conflict between Michelle and Nikki. These issues are sensitive and if not controlled, can increase the conflict and turn it into a serious problem beyond control. Clearly, Michelle emotions have been provoked because she must switch shifts and find new daycare, something she is not happy about it. Although Nikki knows that Michelle is not happy with the change in the shift, she does not understand the reasons behind it. Nikki believes that her position, rights and powers interests are being ignored, in part because Michele does not seem to understand Nikki’s needs. Michele has a right to be given time to take care of her child without losing her job. Michelle is also unhappy with the fact that some employees are getting preferential treatment in the workplace. Nikki on the other hand must ensure smooth flow of operations and that there is timely attendance. Her interests are geared towards workplace productivity and she has the powers to impose her judgment as a manager. Question two Biases can have detrimental outcomes in a negotiation process especially when parties bring prejudgments about the other party. One of the most common types of biases is stereotypes, which is a general assumption concerning a group of people who share similar characteristics. In the current case, Nikki is biased towards a particular section of employees who include Michelle. According to Nikki, this section of employees is continuous nuisance to the organization despite having worked at the call center for a longer time. Another bias applicable THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL 3 in the conflict between Nikki and Michelle is the selective and confirmation bias, which occurs when managers pay attention to a section of available information while ignoring the rest (Liu, Liu & Zhang, 2016). If a manager develops a bad image of a person, he might be more likely to pay attention to bad behaviours of the individual and pay little attention to behaviour that might contradict his opinion. Nikki might be focusing on the need for timely attendance and increased productivity in the workplace while ignoring the fact that Michelle needs balance between work and life. It is likely that Nikki looks at the detrimental effects of Michelle’s problem of workplace productivity without considering the situation Michelle is facing. Question three Dealing with a person whose emotions are running high can be a challenging thing to do. In the current case, Michele appears to be losing her patience and her emotions are getting the best of her. There are several strategies that Nikki can use to neutralize Michelle’s emotions, but the most important thing is to ensure good communication during the negotiation process (Bonaccio, O’Reilly & O’Sullivan et al., 2016). First, Nikki must be careful with her words to ensure they are not only appropriate, but also carefully designed to ensure Michelle is not emotionally provoked. Second, Nikki should pay close attention to the desires and interests of Michelle by learning to be a good a listener. This way, Michelle will be able to out her frustrations and express her needs and feel satisfied that someone is listening. Because negative emotions can be toxic, Nikki must be careful not to get emotional. She must remain calm and control her emotions to avoid escalating the problem into something more serious and unmanageable. Fifth, eye contact is important to let Michelle know that she is engaged even when not speaking. The sixth strategy to dealing with Michelle’s emotions is ensuring the right body position. Sometimes, people send the wrong message because of not minding how they sit THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL 4 and during negotiation. Lastly, Nikki should engage in solid questioning in order to fully explore Michelle’s interests and frustration and fully understand her frustrations. THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL 5 References Bonaccio, S., O’Reilly, J., O’Sullivan, S. L., & Chiocchio, F. (2016). Nonverbal behavior and communication in the workplace: A review and an agenda for research. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1044-1074. Liu, W., Liu, L. A., & Zhang, J. D. (2016). How to dissolve fixed ‐pie bias in negotiation? Social antecedents and the mediating effect of mental‐model adjustment. Journal of organizational behavior, 37(1), 85-107. Lewicki, Roy, Bruce Barry, David Saunders. Essentials of Negotiation.. [Bookshelf Ambassadored]. Running Head: NEGOTIATION PLANNING Negotiation Planning Bria Jones Rasmussen College Negotiation and Conflict Management August 20, 2019 1 NEGOTIATION PLANNING Integrative negotiation is also referred to us the win-win negotiation. Integrative negation is a strategy which parties involved work together to a win-win solution to their quarrel. The main aim of this strategy is to develop a mutual advantageous covenant depending on the concern of the disputants, while on the other hand distributive bargaining is a reasonable bargaining strategy whereby one party will gain only if the other party loses something. Distributive negotiation strategy is utilized in distributing a fixed resource like money, assets as well as resources among the parties involved. Both distributive and integrative negotiations have some merits as well as a demerit. One of the major demerits with integrative negotiation is that since it involves a win-win situation at the end, offering something and not gaining anything at the end becomes a demerit of the negotiation. All the clients involved ought to have a clear understanding that if they want all then there is something that they will have to give so that it can be win-win for both parties but the moment one fails to deliver then it becomes a demerit (Harrington, Dworkin,Withers, Onono, Kwena, & Newmann, 2016). Another demerit is that you find out that one of the parties is offering a lower quotation on an average commodity while the other party is offering a higher price with an assurance of a good product. Most of the clients may opt to choose the lower price commodity but with low quality which symbolizes that the owner is the only one who has won and not both hence becoming a demerit. On the other hand, one of the merits of integrative negotiation is that it focuses on establishing a long term relationship as well as facilities working as a team shortly. Moreover, we also have the distributive negotiation which also has some demerits such that it focuses on short terms goals of working with the other party. Also on the other hand distributive. Also, there is some conflict doggedness who believes that distributive bargaining is 2 NEGOTIATION PLANNING not necessary. It has also been noted that since distributive negotiation tends to result in destructive actions as well as at times forces the parties involved focusing on their disparities which are not supposed to be the case. But apart from that distributive negotiation also has got some merits whereby in circumstances where the negotiator requires reducing the value attained in a single deal as when the relationship with the other party is not vital then distributive negotiation will be of great merit at that point. After having a clear comparison between the two negations tactics Michelle needs to opt for integrative negotiation. There is also some issue which Michelle is undergoing and due to this, it forms the backbone as to why she has to go with integrative negation. Michelle is not able to obtain good daycare since she is a single mother. Apart from that Michelle is suffering from lack of work and life balance. Also on the other hand bearing in mind that negotiation has to take place then there is always a need to recognize the interest of both parties. One of the major interests of both parties is that there is a need for timely attendance. Also according to the case of Michelle adhering in times of work is another interest for both parties (Fuller, & Putnam, 2016). Having no absenteeism or minimal absenteeism is also another major interest between both parties. There are also some of the resistance points. Change ought to be made on the other members of staff schedules. Also, there is a flashback coming from the other members of staff also requesting the changes to their shifts. On the Michelle plan, there is also her alternatives as well as for BATNA. According to Michelle, her best alternative is that if the management doesn’t concur to her request then she opts to come along with her child to work. But on another thought, Michelle can be able to request for the provision of additional payments for her to be able to meet her wants of offering great care to her child. The opening bids, as well as Michelle’s objectives, are as follows. Michelle will have first to give a clear explanation as to why she is 3 NEGOTIATION PLANNING searching for a change in shift. Michelle can provide the information to the management on how the changes in the shift are resulting in a huge impact on her individual life as well as childcare. Michelle ought then to wait for the management to also provide their perspective and be able to see what they can also bring to the table. Below are the constituents as well as the social context which negotiation will take place. The discussion will happen with Nikki plus the human resource manager representative who is available. Since this is the concern with the shift timing, there will be a need for the presence of the senior operational manager. Analysis of the other party which is Nikki or the management may not come into terms with Michelle regarding her change to shift timing. This is because the other workers may have concerns with the changes in shifts, even though a diverse plan was developed earlier on (Yahia, Ayadi, & Masmoudi, 2017). For the organization to avoid conflicts within the organization they may not agree to her request of change in a shift but they take into consideration that Michelle to be allowed to come with her child to work. 4 NEGOTIATION PLANNING Reference Fuller, R. P., & Putnam, L. L. (2016). Planning for a Negotiation. In Stretching Boundaries: Cases in Organizational and Managerial Communication (pp. 161-166). Routledge. Harrington, E. K., Dworkin, S., Withers, M., Onono, M., Kwena, Z., & Newmann, S. J. (2016). Gendered power dynamics and women’s negotiation of family planning in a high HIV prevalence setting: a qualitative study of couples in western Kenya. Culture, health & sexuality, 18(4), 453-469. Yahia, W. B., Ayadi, O., & Masmoudi, F. (2017). A fuzzy-based negotiation approach for collaborative planning in manufacturing supply chains. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 28(8), 1987-2006. Lewicki, Roy, Bruce Barry, David Saunders. Essentials of Negotiation.. [Bookshelf Ambassadored]. 5
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running head: POWER AND NEGOTIATION

Power and Negotiation
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

POWER AND NEGOTIATION
Power and Negotiation
Question one
Nikki and Michelle are both employees to the organization. However, Michelle’s powers
are subordinate to Nikki’s. This is because she is answerable to Nikki who is the manager to the
company. Just to mention, Nikki’s powers are derived from his position as the manager of the
organization Brett, J., &...


Anonymous
Great! 10/10 would recommend using Studypool to help you study.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags