Dairy Company Negotiation Exercise - Essay Example

Dairy Company Negotiation Exercise College: Dairy Company Negotiation Exercise Negotiation is an effective conflict resolution strategy that employs diplomacy to provide solution to complex organizational problems. Often conflicts arise in organizations between the management and the workers requiring the two parties to engage in a negotiation process to arrive at a concession. Dispute in an organization is a manifestation of differences in the opinions, leading to a disagreement. While disputes may be unhealthy in an organization, they are inevitable and have to be resolved as soon as they occur.

In the Dairy Company, a dispute exists between the employees and the management and there is a necessity for an effective negotiation plan if the workers have to secure their rights and reach a concession with the management of Dairy Company. As Dairy Company workers, the two most important issues is to negotiate for wage increment and the manner in which employees will be nominated for training. In any negotiation process, it is crucial for every party to establish the most critical issues that need special attention.

As Fells (2012) points out, matters that have a direct impact on the parties should be given priority in a negotiation. The comfort of an employee depends on their wages and hence this matter is a priority. The issue on employee training is crucial since it has a long term impact on the employee position in the company. On the other side, the issue on the duration of the negotiation will be regarded as least significant. The reason why this issue is least significant is because it is has little impact on the group.

While a short duration is better, a long duration for negotiation will have no negative impact on the economic aspect of the deal. The group will remain open to discuss this matter with the management team. For the purpose of this negotiation, a distributive strategy will be used to win over the management to secure a better welfare for the organization. Schermerhorn (2010, p. 350) suggests that the approach used by any party in a negotiation determines its bargaining power, and the extent to which the party successfully wins in the negotiation.

A distributive strategy will allow the workers to push for what they feel is right as one way of fighting for their welfare in Dairy Company. To achieve this, the workers will negotiate for 10% salary increment every year and merited appointment for training. An integrative approach or principled negotiation will be used in case a conflict arises as a way of expression the worker commitment to the negotiation process. Fells (2012) regards a successful negotiation as one in which all parties gain at the end of the dispute resolution.

The reason why this approach will be used is to avoid possible barriers to the success of the negotiation. The distributive strategy will be used at the pre-negotiation stage to develop a competitive bargaining advantage at this phase (Rodriguez, 2013). This strategy will be specifically employed to negotiate of the wage increment procedures to ensure that the employees win in this matter. To achieve this, it is crucial to start high and maintain a firm ground on this matter (Fells, 2012). The workers will express minimal willingness to concede in this matter.

As Saner (2008) advices, distributive bargaining is the way to go if a party intends to get the largest share in a negotiation process. At the settlement stage, the employees will engage principled negotiation to ensure that the matters on the training are optimal and that both parties feel as winners at the end of the negotiation. Here, the workers will concede quite quickly and there will be no necessity to remain firm. From the workers end, a number of conflicts can be anticipated to arise during the negotiation process.

First, it is likely that the management will oppose the proposed 10% salary increase during the negotiation process. The fact that a distributive approach will be engaged at this stage and the worker representatives are expected to remain firm, it is likely that a conflict will arise at this stage (Craver, 2007). To resolve this conflict, the workers will provide a last offer to the management team as part of their slow concession tactics. To achieve this, the worker will admit to an 8% salary increase every financial year.

This will ease the conflict and express the employees’ willingness to cultivate a mutual relationship. Another conflict that is anticipated is likely to arise on the matter regarding the development of training programs. The workers stand is that the employees be allowed to take up training session at their own time without having to wait for the organization training vacancies. In addition, if an employee has been trained for a higher rank, they should be paid an allowance before such a position is available in the organization.

To resolve this conflict, the workers will ease on the matter on the amount of the allowance paid to a trained employee. An integrative approach will be allowed at this point to allow the management team to express their regard for the matter. A minimum trained allowance of one third of the salary will be considered a win-win position for the two parties. The essence of this is to reduce the time limit of the settlement stage to arrive at a concession at a faster rate (Fells, 2012). In conclusion, the worker-representatives will apply both integrative and distributive approaches to bargaining for the matter touching on their welfare, particularly on the wage increment and employee training procedures.

A distributive approach will help the workers remain firm on the matter directly impacting on their welfare. Possible tactics to achieve this effective bargaining position includes remain firm on these matters, assuming a slow concession process and remaining forceful. On the other hand, an integrative approach will be employed at the settling phase to pave way for an agreement that satisfies both parties. To resolve any emerging conflicts, the workers will employ clear-cut compromise to speed up the negotiation process.

References Craver, C., (2007). Principles and Tactics of Negotiation. Journal of Oncology practice, 11(5), 11-18. Fells, R. E. (2012). Effective negotiation: From research to results. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Saner, R. (2008). The expert negotiator: Strategy, tactics, motivation, behaviour, leadership. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Rodriguez, J., (2013). The Four Phases of the Negotiation Process. Retrieved from: < http://construction.about.com/od/Construction-Management/tp/Four-Phases-Of-Negotiation-Process.

htm> Schermerhorn, J. R. (2010). Exploring management. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. .