Negotiation in Management Decision Making Essay Example for Free

Negotiation in Management Decision Making Essay Having been approached by The Director of the Cowley Council Council (CCC) regarding an industrial dispute with their refuse collectors, a report has been prepared to give insight into the field of negotiation and aid the council in their talks with the refuse collectors. The dispute is primarily concerned with CCC’s plans to change working practices but there are also a number of other issues regarding pay, shift patterns and recent cuts in the training budget and expenses. The refuse collectors are threatening to go on strike if their demands are not met, an action that the council would undoubtedly like to avoid. According to Rubin and Brown (1975), negotiation refers to a process in which individuals work together to formulate agreements regarding an issue or issues in dispute. An agreement will only occur if the offers made are accepted by both of the parties (Neale Northcraft 1991) and should lead to order and stability, foster social harmony, increase feelings of self-efficacy, reduce the probability of future conflict, and stimulate economic prosperity (Rubin et al 1994). Getting the negotiation game right is ever important for managers â€Å"as the global economy expands, as the service sector grows, as corporate restructuring continues and as employees continue to be concerned with managing their own careers† (Neale and Bazerman 1992: 3). The initial stages of the report will cover theory and research on the decision-analytic approach to negotiation and discuss its relevance and potential use for CCC regarding its dispute with the Cowley refuse collectors. I will then identify potential biases and pitfalls that can act as barriers to effective negotiation that CCC should try to avoid. Finally I will conclude and outline suggested proposals for CCC to consider with the aim of assisting and improving their negotiations with the refuse collectors. The decision-analytic approach to decision making is a more pragmatic alternative to the dominant psychological and economic perspectives, which contain a number of limitations. The individual-attribute literature fails to measure dispositions adequately, the situational literature does not consider the importance of the negotiator’s perceptions in interpreting situational characteristics (Neale and Bazerman 1991: 20) and the game theory unrealistically assumes â€Å"impeccably rational, supersmart people† (Raiffa 1982, 2001). What differentiates the decision-analytic approach is its focus on â€Å"how erring folks like you and me actually behave† rather than on how we would behave if we were â€Å"smarter, thought harder, were more consistent, were all knowing† (Raiffa, 1982: 21). Previous psychological and economic approaches have focused on describing how people make decisions or prescribing how to improve decision making. However, â€Å"very little interaction has occurred between the descriptive and prescriptive camps† (Neale and Bazerman 1991: 20), and it is Raiffa’s (1982) avocation of an â€Å"asymmetrical† prescriptive/descriptive relationship that makes the decision-analytic approach stand out, â€Å"creating a prescriptive need to descriptively understand how negotiators actually make decisions† (Bazerman et al 2001). Many scholars hold the view that the prescriptions gained from this model are more valuable than those offered by more traditional approaches (Lax and Sebenius 1986). Raiffa’s framework for approaching effective negotiations distinguishes three sets of information, a combination of which determines the structure of the negotiation game: each parties alternative to a negotiated agreement, each parties set of interests, and the relative importance of each parties interests. â€Å"To develop agreement, people need to get a good understanding of their own preferences and priorities, to communicate those to their counterpart, and to integrate information about other’s preferences and priorities into their own understanding of the problem at hand† (De Dreu et al 2000). Before CCC enter into any negotiations with the refuse collectors, it is imperative to determine a Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), â€Å"the standard against which any proposed agreement should be  measured† (Fisher, and Ury 1981). Negotiations can be greatly improved by identifying a BATNA and â€Å"carefully evaluating the negotiated agreement against that alternative† (Ertel 1999). This helps negotiators fix a reservation point, a lower bound, which is crucial to monitor throughout the negotiation. Agreements that provide more value than the BATNA are preferred over impasse; likewise any agreements that provide less than the BATNA should be rejected. A potential BATNA for CCC would be to look into other refuse collection companies opening up the possibility of privatisation. The privatisation of refuse collection is a serious consideration in many areas of the UK and a â€Å"major debating point for the city council† (Birmingham Mail 2013) in Birmingham. Waste Concern, a private refuse collection company, claims that 17% of council tax goes towards refuse collection and that privatisation would lead to a cheaper, more frequent collection service, and a more efficient recycling system (edieWaste 2010). If CCC values the current refuse collectors, despite the current dispute, and they are reluctant to consider such an ultimatum, they could consider a more strategic change by introducing the proposed changes incrementally, or by altering the amount of changes being made. It is crucial for negotiators to understand each party’s key interests and how they align (Reardon 2005 : 28). Fisher and Ury (1981) emphasize the importance of the distinction between a parties’ position, and their interests, with a position being the stated requirement that a party demands from the other side, whist an interest is the underlying desire of the negotiator and the motives for their position. It can however be difficult to understand ones interests and those of the other party. CCC’s primary interests are increasing productivity and decreasing costs, whilst the refuse collectors’ interests are concerned with their financial rewards. It is however important to try and understand all of the parties’ interests. The Personnel Director may be under pressure to cut costs in order to stick to a budget so her personal interests may have more focus on performing her job in order to maintain it. The interests of the refuse collectors also concern HR aspects such as, work life balance and training and development. These interests are motives behind the position of their threat of strike, and further scrutiny may offer CCC potential areas to focus on during negotiation. Focussing on deeper interests can provide a more reasonable bargaining platform and a creative and practical solution to a negotiation. Once the interests of each party have been established, it is important for negotiators to try and value the relative importance of each party’s interests. This then allows the parties to effectively trade-off less important issues to gain more important issues. If CCC can establish that, for example, the refuse collectors desire a better work life balance as well as sufficient financial benefits, there may be potential for a medium ground to be reached offering a certain amount of each. The importance of interests often comes down to economic factors, thus job security is frequent consideration. In this instance the job security of the refuse collectors is at risk as there is a chance of redundancies if they do not cooperate. This information provides â€Å"the building blocks for thinking analytically about a negotiation† (Bazerman and Moore 2009:154) and prepares the parties for the two primary tasks of negotiation: creating and claiming value (Lax and Sebenius 1986). It is crucial for negotiators to establish the reservation points of both parties. That is the worst possible outcome they will accept before a negotiation is impasse. With both reservation points established, a positive bargaining zone is created, which allows negotiators to â€Å"aim for a resolution that is barely acceptable to the other party† (Bazerman and Moore 2009: 156) by getting as close to their reservation point as possible. It is however, also vital for both parties to try and cooperate in creating value in the negotiation, as there is often â€Å"opportunity to considerably enlarge the pie before cutting it into shares for each side to enjoy† (Raiffa 2002: 91). Lax and Sebenius (1986) stress that differences must be seen as opportunities, as opposed to barriers, that can be explored to find the most efficient solution rather than just ‘satisficing’ (Simon 1956). According to Schmidt and Tannenbaum (1960) â€Å"differences can help to increase the range and variety of alternatives suggested† and even potentially â€Å"enrich ones own goals, ideas, and methods. † So CCC must capitalise on the differences in the party preferences (Pruitt 1983) by evaluating the  position of the refuse collectors, and looking into finer detail at the interests behind these positions, before attempting to develop â€Å"novel alternatives† through â€Å"creative problem solving† (Neale and Bazerman 1991: 24). Negotiation then depends fundamentally on parties’ ability to trade issues against each other (Froman Cohen 1970) and â€Å"place demands and formulate concessions to foster agreements that meet their own goals, while avoiding that the counterpart leaves the situation† (De Dreu et al 2000). CCC could for example offer certain alternative benefits to the refuse collectors if the changes are implemented. Perhaps an investment in more efficient equipment and machinery would be appealing. There are certain tools that negotiators can use in order to aid their efforts in collecting information and subsequently increase the probability of creating value. It is certainly the case that deception is often used in negotiation (Schweitzer 1997) and can be an effective strategy for increasing one’s own outcomes (O’Connor and Carnevale 1997). However in this instance, both parties must also note that building trust and initiating a â€Å"free flow of information is critical to finding and integrative agreement† (Johns and Saks 2011)). In heated negotiations this is far easier said than done, as neither side wants to give away too much information on their stance on particular issues. However, CCC is in the position to try and create a trustworthy relationship in order to improve their informational position. The director could inform the refuse collectors of the councils’ pressures and financial limitations that are the driving factor behind the need to change the working practices and make cuts. If no suitable solution is agreed upon, then there may have to be redundancies, as the council cannot overspend. Another tactic could be to strategically disclose some information. As behaviours in negotiation are often reciprocated (Lewicki and Litterer 1985), this may prompt the refuse collectors to open up and start revealing information which may facilitate the negotiation process. CCC must also ask a lot of questions to increase the chances of ascertaining critical information. According to Bazerman and Moore (2009: 162) â€Å"asking questions and listening actively are the keys to collecting important new information from the other side† but it also important for negotiators to remember that information can be gained from what is not said, as well as  what is said. An alternative to trading issues would be for CCC to arrange some kind of contingency contract to verify weather their plans to change working practices is fair or weather it is being rightly disputed by the refuse collectors. CCC could assess a weeks worth of collection rounds and together with the refuse collectors, formulate weekly targets in terms of time and productivity. A weeks trial on this type of contingency contract could easily establish weather CCC’s planned changes are justifiable or not. There are a number of ways in which contingent contracts can benefit the outcomes to negotiations as outlined by Bazerman and Gillespie (1999). Firstly organising the implementation of a contingency contract can identify bluffs by insincere parties. This will aid CCC initially with regard to their uncertainties over issues such as the number of staff needed on each collection round, shift patterns and pay. Contingency contracts are also a useful tool in incentivising performance. It may provide more motivation for the refuse collectors to start working at or above the levels specified in the contract.

Transitions Of Reptiles To Mammals Essays -- essays research papers

Transitions of Reptiles to Mammals A long long time ago, in a galaxy not too far away, was a little blue planet called Earth, and on this world not a single mammal lived. However a lot of time has past since then and we now have lots of furry creatures that are collectively called mammals. How did they get their? Where did they come from? These are the kinds of questions that led me to my subject of choice. I will endeavor to provide examples, using specific transitional fossils, to show that mammals have evolved from a group of reptiles and were simply not placed here by unknown forces. Before I begin, I would like to define some terms so that nobody gets left in the dust. The term transitional fossil can be used in conjunction with the term general lineage, together they help explain the how one species became another. "General lineage": This is a sequence of similar genera or families, linking an older to a very different younger group. Each step in the sequence consists of some fossils that represent certain genus or family, and the whole sequence often covers a span of tens of millions of years. A lineage like this shows obvious intermediates for every major structural change, and the fossils occur roughly (but often not exactly) in the expected order. However, usually there are still gaps between each of the groups. Sometimes the individual specimens are not thought to be directly ancestral to the next-youngest fossils (e.g. they may be "cousins"" or "uncles" rather than "parents"). However they are assumed to be closely related to the actual ancestor, since the have similar intermediate characteristics. Where Does It All Begin ? Mammals were derived during the Triassic Period ((from 245 to 208 million years ago) It began with relatively warm and wet conditions, but as it progressed conditions became increasingly hot and dry.) from members of the reptilian order Therapsida. The therapsids, members of the subclass Synapsida (sometimes called the mammal-like reptiles),generally were unimpressive in relation to other reptiles of their time. Synapsids were present in the Carboniferous Period (about 280 to 345 million years ago) and are one of the earliest known reptilian groups. Although therapsids were primarily p... ...ng the origin of major new adaptive types. To simplify definitions and to allow the strict delimitation of the Mammalia, some authors have suggested basing the boundary on a single character, the articulation of the jaw between the dentary and squamosal bones and the attendent movement of accessory jaw bones to the middle ear as auditory ossicles. The use of a single character allows the placement in a logical classification of numerous fossil species, other mammalian. characters of which, such as the degree of endothermy and nursing of young and the condition of the internal organs, probably never will be evaluated. It must be recognized, however, that if the advanced therapsids were alive today, taxonomists would be hard-put to decide which to place in the Reptilia and which in the Mammalia. References Carroll, R. 1988. Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution. W.H. Freeman and Co., New York Gingerich, P.D. 1977. Patterns of Evolution in the Mammalian Fossil Record. Elsevier Scientific Pub. Co. Gingerich, P.D. 1985. Species in the Fossil Record: Concepts, Trends, and Transitions. Paleobiology. Rowe, T. 1988. Definition, Diagnosis, and Origin of Mammalia. J. Vert. Paleontology.

Churches do to become a better reflection of Christianity

We must acknowledge that as a church, we need to become better. Unless we admit that we need to improve, we will never strive to be a better reflection of Christianity. As a church, we should help each other point out what is causing our weaknesses and shortcomings in unity and in humility. Never be content. Seek for improvement on a regular basis. As a diverse group with collective beliefs, how can we work as united Christians? What can we do to be a better brother or sister to our fellow church members? How can we help our neighbors? What can we do for our community?How can we show non-believers that the Christian life Is the life they should follow? How can we be a better reflection of our church and of Christianity? These are some questions that we should ask together and seek the answers, together. When outsiders and non-believers see that we are united, they too shall witness God's love that binds us Christians as one big church, one big family. ) â€Å"Sadly, without the atmo sphere of revival, many Christians lapse into something inferior to the Christian norm. Christian culture declines. (Towns, peg 131) Towns pointed out that with the absence of the atmosphere of revival, Christians fall out of the Christian path. My question is: why must revival end? This is a common mistake most churches do. As soon as the mission was fulfilled, we walk away thinking that what we had started/had Just revived will flourish on its own. My challenge, therefore, is continuous revival. Pursue revival not only to the outsiders, non-believers and the nest that have left the Christian path, but also within the people of our church.When a farmer plants his crops, he does not leave it to tend on its own, he will continue visiting his crops, trim the weeds that surround it, water the plants, and make sure that it has what it needs to grow and thrive. We are like the farmer, and our church is our crop, we are responsible for the growth and progress of our Christian community. W e should never cease reviving our church or our community. If we keep that light burning, we will be able to keep our church inspired in working together to be better Christians and followers of Jesus Christ.

The Tragedy of Hamlet by William Shakesperare - 977 Words

â€Å"The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark†, shortened to â€Å"Hamlet†, written by William Shakespeare dramatizes the revenge Prince Hamlet is instructed by his father, King Hamlet, to execute on his uncle Claudius, who murdered the king. Not only did he kill Hamlet’s father but then succeeded to the throne and took the murdered king’s wife, Gertrude, to be his own. Shakespeare uses Hamlet’s major soliloquies to depict a close to clear picture of Hamlet’s true character. He gives us many soliloquies, generally centered around the emptiness of his existence, suicide, death, suffering, and fear of what is beyond the human race after dying. The journey of reading one soliloquy after another guided the audience to not only sympathize with Hamlet, but also reveal his one tragic flaw and his struggle to overcome it. Hamlet’s struggle throughout the play to bring everyone to justice and avenge his father only occurs because of his inconc lusiveness. Because of the major soliloquies in Shakespeare’s â€Å"Hamlet†, the reader is able to sympathize with this dramatic character throughout his heart- rending development and understand his character from a different perspective keeping in mind his good attributes and tragic flaw. In his first soliloquy, it is apparent that Hamlet is very distressed about a few things. Hamlet begins his first soliloquy in a very depressed manor by saying,† O, that this too too sullied flesh would melt†¦But break, my heart; for I must hold my tongue.† (Shakespeare,