Different Phases in a Negotiation and its Developing - Literature review Example

DOES IDENTIFYING DIFFERENT PHASES IN A NEGOTIATION HELP US UNDERSTAND AND DEVELOP THE NEGOTIATION Name Grade Course: Tutor’s Name: (23 September 2010) Does Identifying Different Phases in a Negotiation Help Us understand and Develop The Negotiation Introduction Success in a negotiation process is achieved when the parties agree on a mutual situation; this is specifically the purposes, goals and aims of negotiations. Negotiations are important in view of the fact that they help unlock stalemates and deadlocks that have occurred in a peaceful manner and thus losses are evaded. It is important to note that negotiation is a process and particular steps or phases in the process must be observed so as to ensure they are successful. It is therefore correct to state that identifying the different phases in a negotiation will help people understand and develop the process as stated by Guasco, & Robinson, 2007 p.47. This is so because each process has different step and assuming one may lead to complications in the future state of the process. This will help in ensuring all issues in the dilemma are resolve procedurally and when anything is found a miss then the process can be reviewed easily by the problem identified. Phases also simplify the implementation of the agreed solutions in that the solutions may be monitored and evaluated depending on the fulfilment of each party (Dietmeyer, 2004 p.32). This paper helps to understand and develop the negotiation process in a workplace environment and more specifically in identifying the phases or steps in negotiations. This will be important to help understand the importance of these phases in the negotiation process and how they contribute to achieving a win-win situation in the negotiations. The paper addresses the issue of principles and the possibility to negotiate and reach an agreement in a dairy products company and relates to the dairy which produces ice cream and a range of milk-based products. It focuses on the negotiations between the management and workers union the phases used and solutions developed. Negotiation Process and Phases The negotiation process involves coming to an agreement through talks, discussions, bargaining, trading, conferring, compromising, arguing, and positioning. All these skills need to be included in the process effectively so that all parties agree. Many authors have described different phases and as cited in Rojot, 1999 p.181 the number of phases vary depending on the author. For example, Zartman identified two stages with the first being developing a general prescription for agreement and number two being an implementation of the details in the first step. The four stages described by Warr included; getting organized, breaking up, accepting a common goal, and finding a solution. Other studies brought out the six phase process which include, first in agreeing on the problem, second is setting the principles and objectives, third is agreeing on the rules of the negotiations, fourth is defining the concerns and outlining an agenda, fifth is agreeing on the formula to operate from in solving the concerns, and sixth is agreeing on the details of implementation. And as Dukes, et al. 2000 p.102 explains whichever phase used the final outcome must be guaranteed to solve and eliminate the problem in a mutual agreement that is acceptable to all parties. The negotiation process however can be said to have three stages where the first includes knowledge of each other, the problems involved and the environment. The second stage involves attempts to create agreements by choosing from different options, and the third stage is the decision making stage where the parties agree on a mutual understanding. Rojot, 1999 p.195 identifies three different sections of the process which are; section one encompasses planning section two include; the three phases of the process i.e. beginning, middle, and end phase. Section 3 is the post negotiation phase which addresses the implementation and/or further negotiations. The planning section is very crucial but is normally ignored by many individuals because of inadequacy in time, pressure brought by other tasks, assumptions of expertise, ignorance, and evading paper work. It involves finding, evaluating, making assumptions, outlining objectives, identifying various strategies, styles and tactics in the negotiation. This section ensures that one goes to the negotiating table well informed and having a better advantage over the other party. Planning should be flexible and the time taken is not limited (Shell, 2006 p.52). The second section has three crucial phases where the beginning phase is the phase of identifying the possibilities of entering into negotiations. It establishes the first meeting and acts as a social encounter where the major differences between the parties are stated. The negotiation process is directed according to this encounter where the agenda is set and the negotiation tactics and styles identified. When the beginning phase ends the negotiating parties should evaluate the possibility of a possible solution to the problem being negotiated. The middle or second phase is needed to define the deal to be agreed on and as discussed on phase 1. The bargaining power applies here where the parties apply different strategies to woo each other to their side. The two sides exchange information, time constraints and timing plans and a search for any alternatives are explored. Numerous questions are posed on the problem to completely address the issues at hand. In case of any deadlock in this phase then adjournment is necessary for the parties to consult within themselves. A change of tactics at this stage is risky but deadlocks always need prior planning before changes are made. Negotiations may also call for a change in those involved in the process so as to end a stalemate, send a signal of a different strategy, and for merging of styles in the process (Sebenius, 2002 p.172). This phase may also require the negotiating team to subdivide into smaller committees to deliberate on specific issues while the main committee focuses on the main issue. This will make the process faster and more comprehensive. The end phase or phase 3 finalizes the process and is characterized by the decision making. This comes progressively from phase 2 and gauges whether the decisions will be mutually accepted or rejected (Cohen, 2002 p.65). This phase requires commitment on both parties where they must ensure they deliberate on the contentious issues in the process. They both must be willing to sacrifice something in the process of finding a lasting solution. If the talks collapse at this stage then numerous losses will be incurred in terms of time, money, and investments. Whatever is agreed on is deemed as binding and both parties will need to be very careful not to be tricked into accepting tricky deals that might be controversial in future. The post negotiation phase or section three is mainly concerned with implementations and further negotiations. It addresses the adequate solving of the problem, the problems encountered, and what can be change and/or improved in the situation. In the case study on the daily product company the initial steps have been passed and the process is ongoing. The classification structure and pay rates have been agreed as well as many other issues such as; annual leave, and meal breaks, however, five contentious issues are still unresolved. These unresolved issues are; firstly, the relativities between the various classifications have been established but it is still necessary to agree upon the basis for increases in wages during the life of the agreement, secondly, the skill requirements for each classification and the related training modules have all been agreed but it is necessary to agree upon the workplace arrangements, such as the process by which employees will be identified for or nominated for training, thirdly, it has been agreed that the nominal weekly hours is 38 to be worked across a multi-week cycle, but it will be necessary to agree upon an hours roster, including implications for shifts and for overtime, fourth, the duration of the agreement, and lastly, the establishment of a joint workplace committee: most of the practical arrangements (size, facilities etc) have been agreed and only two issues remain i.e. whether the committee should be a negotiating body or a consultative one; whether any company information can be kept confidential from the committee. The principles that will be developed in the negotiations must ensure the employees get the bests deal that will enable them get value for their labour as stated by Gottlieb, & Healy, 1998 p.138. Each negotiator will be encouraged not to get personal but deal with the issues in a sober mind; they should all control their emotions even when it seems like a loss. Mnookin, Et. al., 2000 p.98 clear state that confidentiality must be ensured by all the negotiators and all information that is not yet agreed on should remain at the table until agreed on. Fisher, & Ury, 1999 p.71 and Camp, 2002 p.93 explain that this should be a mutual understanding and not a contest all options must be exhausted for a mutual understanding before sacrifices are made by either sides. This means that the members need to exchange several offers before a final agreement is reached on to know which the best is. Each offer should not be followed suit by another offer before the other party proposes others; this means that it is a give and take situation. When one offer is rejected then the party rejecting should propose another offer to avoid exhausting one side’s options. Asherman, & Asherman, 2001 p.38 indicate that negotiations are about taking risks and no risk should be too much to take in order to agree. The negotiators should not be afraid of any expert and should major on its strengths to end the stalemate mutually. Tactful change of position is vital in that one can change names of what was being discussed to suit the negotiations as explained by (Richard, 1999 p.82). Negotiation is a process and rushing it will only lead to more complications in future; negotiators should always take their time and instead of hurrying the process identify the most urgent issues to handle first while the rest are addressed later. Analysis For this case wages increment should be inline with the current economic conditions and thus will be reviewed annually. The review will be subject to appraisals based on effective performance of the employee; however the current remuneration must first be upgraded to meet the economic status. Due to the appraisals the training of employees will be done by departments with those taking specialised functions being considered first. For departments with many employees the supervisor will identify a comprehensive plan to ensure all the employees are trained. The agreed 38 hours across a multi-week cycle remain as agreed and the workers will be forced to work in shifts to ensure they get enough rest but also cover their hours. Three shifts will be identified each of eight hours where all individuals alternate to cover each shift. This will ensure that workers are keen and efficient at all times. Due to the delicacy of the matter a split of the team will be necessary where one will be a negotiating body and the other a consultative one. This will ensure the negotiating body continues implementing the final phase of implementation while the still consult with the other team. Company information will be discrete and only held by the consultative team to avoid disastrous effects such as competitors using it for business gains. Conclusion Negotiations are very important particularly at the work place since it ensures a level playing field for all parties. No one is exploited and thus the workers avoid conflicts which would have been solved through violence. Negotiations give dialogue a chance and eliminate all the losses that may have been caused through strikes, go-slows or unrests in the company. The negotiations process must therefore be followed to the letter and the phases discussed above implemented to ensure conclusive debates on any conflicting issue at the workplace. Those at the negotiation table should be dedicated and informed on the choices they make and be able to defend their positions while allowing dialogue to take place. The different phases identified in this essay i.e. planning; the three phases of the second section i.e. beginning, middle, and end phase, and section 3: the post negotiation phase are timely events that must be addressed in any negotiation process and when one is assumed then the party assuming the phases stands to loose the negotiations or part of the deal due to ignorance. This means that in order to understand and develop the negotiation process the different phases must be identified. List of references Asherman, I., & Asherman, S., 2001, The Negotiation Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Amherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press Camp, J. 2002, Start with No: The Negotiating Tools that the Pros Don't Want You to Know. Crown Publishing Group. Cohen, S.P. 2002, Negotiating Skills for Managers. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies Dietmeyer, B.J. 2004, Strategic Negotiation: A Breakthrough Four-Step Process for Effective Business Negotiation. Dearborn Trade. Dukes, F. E., et al. 2000, Reaching for Higher Ground in Conflict Resolution: Tools for Powerful Groups and Communities. San Francisco: Joey – Bass Fisher, R, & Ury, W, 1999, Getting to Yes. New York: Random House Business Books Gottlieb, MR. & Healy, W J., 1998, Making deals: the business of negotiating. Ed.2, Havard: The Communication Project Guasco, MR, & Robinson, P, 2007, Principles of negotiation: strategies, tactics, techniques to reach agreements. New York: Entrepreneur Press Mnookin, Robert H. et. al., 2000, Beyond Winning: Negotiating to Create Value in Deals and Disputes, Harvard: Harvard University Press Richard, S, 1999, Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People. New York: Viking Rojot, J. 1991, negotiations: from theory to practice, Houndmills, Hant: Macmillan Sebenius, JK, 2002, Six Habits of Merely Effective Negotiators, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation Shell, RG, 2006, Bargaining for Advantage—Negotiations Strategies for Reasonable People, New York: Penguin Books Read More