Conflict in Management, Negotiation between Management and Union - Assignment Example

? Conflict in management, negotiation between management and union, Case study Table of Contents Question Factors affecting the position of management while negotiating for the changes 3 Question 2- Tactics used by the management 5 Question 3- Feasibility of adopting a collaborate/fostering approach for the management 9 Question 4- Strategy to be undertaken by the HR Manager 11 Reference 14 Question 1- Factors affecting the position of management while negotiating for the changes The position of the management is not only considered relative to the environment in which it exists, the parties and their respective stakes in the negotiations, rather it is perceived as a subjective concept. Firstly it is seen that the contexts in which management seeks to bring about a change might not be applicable after a few years or months. This is because situational contexts are dynamic forces which keep changing over time. This can be elaborated using the following example. The management’s decisions to change the grading structures whereby demarcating the duties completely and then amalgamating them into a single and ‘all purpose grade’ system would not be effective after a certain point of time. Also providing the necessary training to the workers to adopt the new skills would become ineffective after a point of time. This is because adopting the new skills would necessarily be resisted by the workers as they would have gained competence in the skills they were working over the years. The availability of a generous fund for Mirenda Corporation can be regarded as a positive factor for the organization. This can be used as a tool for convincing employees about the plans of expanding operations, availing of new equipments and training employees on new skills. Also the change programs that the management was seeking to adopt would be affected by the fact whether their previously adopted changes were successful. Moreover, the higher productivity from each individual worker against the salaries they were offering would be accepted only on the condition whether the previous promises were fulfilled. For example, if it is seen that the management had failed to keep their previously made promises then they would not have strong position to bargain with the union. In the Miranda Corporation, the management’s decision to not concede with the claim for compensation for past productivity was not appreciated by the union. In this regard it can be said that the management would hold a weak position if it failed to meet the unsettled claims. One of the strengths that the management had was the support of the supervisors. This could be used as a positive force while bargaining with the union. The supervisors were found to be an aged group and had little satisfaction with the workings of the unions. In fact they considered the union representatives as being opportunistic and worked in a way which was neither fair nor meant to bring about long term benefits to the workers or the company. Thus the management could utilize this opportunity and cater to the key interests of the members. According to the case of the Ford Company and the United Auto Workers (UAW), the negotiation between the management and the unions was primarily based on the thought of crystallizing the interests of the members. The management’s strength laid in the fact that it meant to protect the retiree benefits, ensure investments and jobs, and tried to secure greater voice of the workers in the business. So it can be said that trying to meet the interests of the workers by listening to their problems and needs would act as strength while negotiating with them. It is through serving their interests would the management be successful in earning their participation in driving through the company’s plans for the plant (Anonymous, n.d., p.3). One of the greatest threats which have been observed is the position of Spain’s branch. It is believed that if the management did not incorporate radical changes in its work structures, practices, procedures and capacities, it would not be able to be the flagship or the leader in the European market. Consequently the Spanish counterpart would emerge leader in the process. Moreover the time left to the management to implement the changes was also small which can be regarded as a threat for the company. Question 2- Tactics used by the management a. From the case of Miranda Corporation it is revealed that the management has been too transparent about the future plans and expectations from the workers which created an open resentment among them. The company’s communication with the employees ended up in heated arguments and harsh exchange of words. This shows that the management’s negotiating strategies should have been different. Firstly it needs to be ensured that the management makes a firm commitment. Making a firm commitment would account for a potential advantage for a negotiator. However the management has to decide the extent or degree of commitment which is appropriate for the situation. In this regard the collaborative or problem solving style of negotiation is recommended among the four styles of negotiation as apparent from the following figure. Figure 1: Management's styles of negotiation (Source: Singh, 2009, p.21) Negotiators exhibiting this kind of negotiation style use honest and open communication and eventually find creative solutions which satisfy both parties. They also remain open to exploring a number of alternatives for consideration. Thus the new commitment to share bonuses according to the output and quality of performance would have to be made effective. However ‘tactical arguments’ would be needed in this context. It would be important to highlight on the issues which would arise if the changes were implemented and consequently how these issues would affect the workers negatively. Workers must be made to realize the long term benefits of the changes in the organization as well as their own lives and the negative implications of not implementing the changes. Certain procedural tactics could also be used by the management in convincing the workers. Firstly Bert Finn could invite a senior representative from the union to participate in the negotiation because he would have greater experience about the industry, a better understanding of the issues and would also be aware of the bigger picture. In this way workers could also ensure that the management would not be able to convince them illogically or persuade them with illogical arguments. The third procedural tactic which can be used is to locate someone in the opponent group who would evaluate the issue in the favour of the management. In this case the supervisors can be included in the purpose. This is because they were aware of the shortcomings of the union and the discontentment which was spreading because of that. Their participation in the negotiations would help the management have their support and attain an advantageous position while negotiating. b. The main concern for the management was the management and worker relationship which would have an impact on the negotiations. From the very beginning of the problem it was realized by the HR management that the Irish management would have to undertake a daunting task where the entire plant’s working system would have to be reorganized and transformed if the productivity levels, standards of quality were to be maintained. This means that new technologies, new machines and new products would have to be incorporated into the system. However, implementing the changes was bound to strain relationships between the workers and the management. This would definitely have an impact on the negotiations between them. It is likely that workers would feel that their interests were being ignored at the costs of higher performance and productivity. On the other hand the management’s perception would be that workers would be resistant to all kinds of changes and this would keep from realizing the goals. The concept of bounded rationality can be applied in order to keep the two parties from straining relationships between them. This concept is especially used in a context where both parties have different perceptions about the issues and situations. It is true that the management has to work within a very complex business environment and their capabilities are quite limited. Thus any kind of change that they tried to bring about would have a negative impact on the workers and thus would spoil relationships between them. This method is especially applicable for this case because Finn’s meetings with the different groups of workers and management revealed that each of them had their own perceptions about the case and there were misconceptions among them. While the management seemed to have the opinion that they were compromising too much with the workers and that the unions were keeping them from running their day to day management with their interference; workers felt that their previous grievances had not been settled and were least appreciative of their present condition. This typical misconception existing between workers and managements were straining relationships between the two which was ruining all forms of negotiation tactics that the management was adopting. Bounded rationality could be used for removing miscalculations and misjudgements between employees and management and understanding and anticipating actions of the other party. By removing the emotions that impairs rational negotiations and judgments it can be used as a tool for building strong relationships between the two parties and making the negotiation process successful. In this way the management would be able to elaborate on their demands from the employees backed by adequate rationality and also explore the grievances coming from them without inhibitions. However the good side is that Finn had previously worked in collaboration with the several organization unions in resolving issues. Thus he already had hands-on experience of working in similar circumstances which would help him to handle the present situation with ease. Moreover the fact that Tim Bates, who was appointed as the HR Manager, had prior experience in both unionized and non-unionized organizations companies in Ireland. He had also negotiated with SIPTU in two previous positions. Since he had good relationships with them he could use it for negotiating them without having disputes. Question 3- Feasibility of adopting a collaborate/fostering approach for the management Negotiation is considered an attempt to influence the other party to accept one’s own point of view. The case of Mirenda Corporation demonstrates a situation which demands dramatic changes in the entire company structure and culture. Most importantly the levels of productivity along with the quality standards needed complete restructuring in the company. Additionally the incorporation of new product ranges, introduction of new technology and machines necessarily needed massive changes in the work structures and the workforce on the whole. However, this was not an easy task as the entire decision to make the change process depended on how willingly accepted or embraced the change process and how conveniently they adapted themselves to the new system. In such a condition a collaborative approach is necessarily recommended for handling the situation. Also the fact that the management and union relationships are to be maintained and nurtured the collaborative approach would be most appropriate for the purpose. This is because ‘trust’ plays a key role in the collaborative approach and this particular situation depicts a case where mistrust has crept into the workers minds which need to be removed. While trust cannot prevail right from the beginning of the negotiation process, steps must be taken to build trust between the parties in order to make the process successful. The management’s decision to change the grading structures along with changing the duties and responsibilities of workers associated is likely to bring resistance from them. Workers would have necessarily developed the required expertise and skills for their jobs and would not want to have a sudden change in those responsibilities. Also the quality evaluation process and performance management strategies would be changed which would generated apprehensions in the workers minds and create a sense of insecurity among them. After placing so many demands in front of the workers, the management disagreed to concede the claim to compensate for previous productivities. It is apparent that this is an inappropriate move from the management’s side and would not be accepted by the workers. It is important that the management also works towards meeting some of the claims of workers in order to ensure support from them in return. This is where a collaborative approach is called for. In this context if it to be ensured that workers accept the management’s conditions placed before them, the management would also have to cater to their demands. Also the approach of “do as you are told” is not considered appropriate for this situation (Onaitis, 1999, p.227). In this case a third party can be appointed for advancing in the negotiation process. The fact that there was a lot of mistrust between the management and the union shows that the situation needs a third party to step in. The mode of conciliation can be adopted by the third party to facilitate the process of communication between them. Since the two parties failed to arrive at a path to resolve the problem, the third party would be appointed for acting as a mediator between the two. However, the ownership of the problem would be retained by the two parties only. In this case the role of the third party would necessarily be to explain the reasons of the demands made by the management to the union and highlight on the ways it would benefit them. On the other hand, it would also have the role to explain the expected problems that might arise while reorganizing the workforce and the changes in their duties and responsibilities. Also they would have to ensure that the previous commitments made by the management were met so as to be in a strong position to convince the workers to embrace the changes. Question 4- Strategy to be undertaken by the HR Manager a. From the perspective of an HR Manager, a collaborative approach must be undertaken and a third party must be appointed to deal with the situation. A great deal of transparency and commitment would be required while placing the demands of each party in front of the other. This would necessarily be conducted through a meeting where representatives from all three parties would be present. However, the third party would only act as a mediator while the management and unions would necessarily retain the ownership of the problem. b. Firstly it is important to settle the objectives of the meeting. From the case of Mirenda Corporation it is seen that a higher productivity and greater quality standards are the two essential requirements at the present moment. Thus the main objective of the negotiation would be to convince workers about the management’s decision to set higher performance targets and better quality standards. For this reason work structures would be changed and workers would have to adopt new roles and duties. It is imperative that the management would have to take a strong standing in issues like performance and productivity. However, a compromising attitude would also be needed in certain softer aspects like settling the work shifts, salaries, bonuses etc. Following are the demands that would be placed by the management in front of the union. Firstly it would present the simplified grading structure. The present grading structure comprising of the operative grades and the senior operative grades would be amalgamated into one single grade where the duties and responsibilities would not be greatly demarcated. It is expected that the union would necessarily resist top this sudden change of duties and responsibilities of workers. However, the problem would have to be handled by the management’s decision to provide requisite training to the workers and help them adapt to the new responsibilities and new technologies. This would be followed by setting the performance targets for the organization as well as for the workers. In this context the team targets would be settled in stipulated time. It would especially be mentioned that teams would be responsible for their own management which includes evaluation of quality and performance, training needs and requirements, absent management etc. The working shifts would be mentioned after this. Introduction of the two-shift system in the seven days for all the workers would be necessary. The reason behind this move would have to be explained. The growing market competitiveness and external fluctuations making the extra number of hours of work an absolute necessity in the organization would be communicated to them. The above plan is likely to strike resistance by workers again. However this would have to be tackled carefully by informing them about the new bonus system. The trick would be to highlight on the achievability to attain greater bonus for higher performance. The new bonus structure would be set according to the new standards that would be set by the company. The emphasis would be put on team performance and group activities. This can be followed by the new profit sharing scheme introduced by the management. A proportion of the profits generated by the company would be distributed among workers at the time of Christmas following the first year of export to Europe. However this would be conditioned on the fact that production for the entire year would be free of disruptions like strikes. Lastly, the management would have to ensure that they fulfilled any pending commitments made previously. The claim for past productivity would have to be agreed to attain the workers support for the change. Any sort of unsettled claims would have to be settled with the unions to gain their trust on the fact that the present commitment of the management would be met. The third party would ask the union representatives to put forth any issues which they wanted to settle. They would also be given a platform to share their grievances with the management. Finally, the next meeting would be scheduled which would discuss on the progress after introduction of the changes. Any difficulties in incorporating the same would also be discussed along with the attempts to find a remedial solution to the problem. Reference Singh, N. (2009). Negotiations. Laxmi Publications, Ltd. Onaitis, S. (1999). Negotiate like the big guys: how small and mid-size companies can balance the power in dealing with corporate giants. Silver Lake Publishing. Read More