Ethical Systems That May Guide the Parties through Negotiation - Research Paper Example

Withholding Information Case Registration Number Withholding Information Case Introduction A process that involves the voluntary engagement of parties with the same contrasting interests on issues to reach an amicable solution to the issue is the negotiation process. Mostly, on these occasions, the concerned parties apply different methodologies so as to reach the agreement. An example, in this case, is the withholding method. As a result, the aim of this paper is to evaluate on the ethics during the withholding method of the negotiation process. At its end, the paper gives a conclusion that defines the expectations of the parties participating in the negotiation process through the use of the withholding information case (Cohn, 2007). Ethical Systems That May Guide the Parties to a Negotiation Negotiation process entails three primary ethical systems that provide the guidance for the parties participating; for instance, the ethics of purposes, ethics of principles or the ethics of the consequences. Ethics of purposes takes in principles in relation to the Aristotles views concerning the ethics. Aristotle argued that human beings are just naturally good and, as a result, will have no obligation to work with the objectivity of realizing the positive fruits at the end of the work session (Falvo, 2011). However, the same human beings must use the positive ways and means of getting to the conclusion of the matter before them. As result, such negotiations that tend to ignore the ethics presented in this view may not, in this case, reach the positive end of the matter. In the case of the ethics of principle, the principle presents its arguments in relation to the deontological ethics of Emmanuel Kant. Kant argued that human beings are always irrational and, as a result, will strive towards doing that particular activity that is right as the society expects that from them always. In addition, the human beings under this form of ethics will only adopt the use of the rational ways of doing activities and intern realizing what they intend to achieve their objective plans. Negotiators who go for the option of this principle apply the methodologies considered to be of rational and appropriate so as to find the solution to the problem (Cohn, 2007). The case of the ethics of the consequences takes care of the analysis of the possible outcomes of the present actions. As a result, this form of ethics finds it way of use among people in the evaluation of the actions from the positive outcomes of the most concerned parties in the negotiation process (Falvo, 2011). Consequential ethics, on the other hand, does not consider the importance of the means used to reach the goals. However, the principle considers the outcomes of the process. For this instance, the negotiators who use the principle have the choice of using the available means that can lead to the solution of the issue of them so as to attain the positive outcomes from its conclusion. The Substantive Fairness of the Negotiation Substantive fairness of the negotiation entails the sharing of the values generated by the negotiation process equitably. Consequentially, the value got from the negotiation process should equally distribute among the parties in the negotiation process and also in a manner that they both consent to at the end of the process (Harris, Pritchard & Rabins, 2009). Substantive fairness analyzes the process of the negotiation by using the outcomes of the process. As a result, it applies the principles of proportionality, reciprocity, and the impartiality. Proportionality, in this case, the result of the negotiation process should fairly distribute the values among the concerned parties of the negotiation process. On the other hand, reciprocity principle expects the mutual response from each of the participating parties especially their subject of interests concerning the negotiation process. Impartiality, however, expects the negotiation process not to develop favoritism to either of the participating parties (Martin, 2009). The Procedural Fairness of the Negotiation Procedural fairness as an element of the negotiation process stresses the need for the acceptable and fair procedures and techniques applied in the negotiation process. In most of the occasions, individuals will go for the negotiation process when they expect fairness from the verdict that will come out at the conclusion of the hearings. As a result, the participating parties in the negotiation process should both speak the truth during the proceedings. The instance would enable the final ruling on the matter may draw its findings based on the facts from the participating parties (Martin, 2009). Ethical and Unethical Concealment Behaviors Negotiation’s primary objective is to convince the hardliner party in calming down on the issue of contention so that they may reach the expected solution on the matter. However, there are concealment behaviors that may not form part of the negotiation process. For instance, one party may come with certain demands with the intention of getting favors from the negotiation process. Negotiation, however, does not allow such intentions of seeking to outwit another party through concealing of the information. Negotiation process requires the individuals to reveal the agenda of the process, failure of which creates the wrong way of bargaining for the participating parties in the process (Harris, Pritchard & Rabins, 2009). On the other hand, the negotiation process also has some unethical behaviors it does not expect during the process. For instance, a lawyer should not withhold any technical information related to the matter especially when involved in the negotiation process with an individual who has some legal experience. The instance of this statement is that the other party does not however have the objective of concealing the information as the lawyer does, in this case. Consequentially, the verdict that may come out may not be fair to the parties in the negotiation process (Falvo, 2011). Creating Trust in a Long-Term Negotiation in the Negotiation Process Trust creation from the negotiation parties during the negotiation process is the primary determinant of ensuring equity and fairness in the process upon its completion. Consequentially, building of the trust entails the corporation and the exchange of the information between the parties involved in the process. Trust creation, in addition also builds confidence in the expected verdict from the negotiating team on the issue of contention among the parties in the negotiation (Cohn, 2007). Conclusion Negotiation process functions well under the guidance of three primary ethical systems; ethics of purpose, ethics of principle and ethics of consequences. As result, the individuals involved in the negotiation have their expectations from the conclusion of the subject matter. In this case, by individuals working based on these ethics would in the end earn the positive outcomes on their issue of conflict at the end of the negotiation process. References Carrell, M., & Heavrin, C. (2008). Negotiating essentials. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Cohn, A. (2007). Constipation, Withholding and Your Child. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Falvo, D. (2011). Effective Patient Education. Sudbury, Mass.: Jones and Bartlett. Harris, C., Pritchard, M., & Rabins, M. (2009). Engineering Ethics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Martin, C. (2009). The Philosophy of Deception. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More