Principled Negotiation - Assignment Example

PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION Principled negotiation Just like any in the management of any other project principled negotiation hasproved to be effective in the management of software development projects. This is particularly true to the project development process that involves the determination of requirements. Through principled negotiation the project management process can ensure that a fair solution whereby every stakeholder benefits are reached. This is the best way through which project managers can make sure that they come up with software that will be of benefit to every stakeholder. It is a technique with limited complications that can be distilled to few ideas which can be very important in requirement engineering. It will also be very important not to ignore the fact that principled negotiation is thorough in terms of the factors that are considered and the presentation of the various requirements of the software stakeholders. This is a technique that has proved to be effective for a person who intends to separate the problem from the stakeholders. For example, clients might not have the same computing background as the suppliers or developers. This implies that there should be a way through which the requirements can take into consideration the difference in the nature of the differences of the stakeholders if in any case the project is to become a success. This is a method that can also enable engineering of requirements to be based on the interests of the negotiators rather than their positions. Through focusing on the interests, a software developer might be able to determine the common ground for all the stakeholders. This is basically because he nature of the software that is developed will need to be in accordance to the requirements of the suppliers and the end users. This negotiation approach also allows for the invention of mutual gain. One thing about computers system is that they usually evolve with time. For instance, in this case it was discovered that the money that was availed by the government would not be sufficient for the required hardware for the necessary spreading of implementation functionality. Therefore, the negotiation process led to the division of the whole project into phases with the first phase being the most important one which was food control. The division into phases was a result of thorough study of the interests of the stakeholder and looking of the most appropriate way through which all the stakeholders would be satisfied even with the limited resources. The fact that people rarely change their positions, it is usually a very big challenge to software developers to come up with software of programs that are applauded by all the stakeholders. However, as seen in this case the use of principled negotiation proved to be an effective way through which the government was able to make sure that the resulting system was in accordance to the requirements of the various stakeholders. The vendors, suppliers, the government, and end users were all able to get their requirements considered in a balanced and rational way (Zwier, 2013). This was enhanced by the fact that the facilitator of the principled negotiation was able to stick to fairness This method was also enabling for the identification of the stakeholders at the genesis of the process and involving them in the requirements engineering. For instance, the committee of the environmental health project had representatives from all stakeholders. However, the only problem that arose was that some of the stakeholders felt left out. More workshops would have helped the requirement engineering process in making sure that all the stakeholders were given a fair chance of contribution. The good thing about principled negotiation is that is can be applied in various other settings apart from requirement engineering. An example of a scenario where principled negotiation might be applicable is one where employees are negotiating for a pay rise with their employers through their various unions. Through principled negotiation there can be a solution whereby both the employers and the employees would be able to be comfortable with the solution that is reached. As a result, no one will be lost as the solution will be one that is satisfactory to both parties. An example of such a case is the negotiation that took place between Hilcorp and the representatives of their employees regarding their salaries. The employees had witnessed an increase in hardship as a result of the increase in the price of living. Prices of all commodities and services had gone up and, therefore, they were finding it hard to have balance in every aspect of their lives with the income that had proved to be insufficient. The negotiators in this process made sure that they first separated the problem from the people. It was important to note that the problems that were faced by the employee was the rise in the cost of life and they wanted a way through which they could be cushioned by some additional payment the company on the other hand was facing the same problem with their cost of production increasing significantly over the past 5 years. At this point the negotiators realized that the positions of the parties involved would not be of much significance. Therefore, it was discovered that focusing on the interests of the parties will be of much benefit to the course of the negotiation (Fisher & Ury, 2012). The interests of the employees were to get a way through which they can cope with the highly increasing prices of commodities and services. The company on the other hand wanted to make sure that they maintain their productivity with all the increased cost of production. The negotiation process involved collecting opinions from both sides on what can be done so that the problem is solved. At this stage the opinions were collected without judging their viability or applicability (Lyons, 2007). A joint committee with members from both sides was formed for the sake of evaluating the collected opinions and looking at those that happened to be welcomed by both sides. Those opinions were reinforced by those that both sides thought that were worth giving a try. Some of the opinions that were seen to be valid include the introduction of bonuses and extra payment for any extra input. Through these opinions, the company would be able to be more productive through the extra contribution of their employees. The employees were also able to earn extra money through putting extra efforts. However, the introduction of bonuses and extra payments were only the beginning of the developments to be made with regard to the payment of employees in the company.one of the concerns of the unions representatives is that they would not want any of the employees to lose their jobs because of the increased salaries. Therefore, they decided that they will come up with a solution whereby none of the employees will lose their job. Therefore, the committee members agreed that the company should review the productivity of their employees after the introduction of extra payment for extra efforts so that they can determine whether or not they will be able increase the salaries of their employees. One thing that both sides agreed on is that when the employees are well compensated and living comfortable lives they will be able to be more productive. Another thing is that the company will not have to unnecessarily lose its treasured employees because recruitment processes can be at times costly or unsuccessful. Therefore, the review will be undertaken by the committee members often being notified about the progress of the reviewing process. References Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (2012). Getting to yes: Negotiating an agreement without giving in. London: Random House Business. Lyons, C. (2007). I win, you win: The essential guide to principled negotiation. London: A & C Black. Zwier, P. J. (2013). Principled negotiation and mediation in the international arena: Talking with evil. Read More