Alex Caraveo 12/2/2012 COMM 1080 Journal Assign.

#4 Principled Negotiations

Principled Negotiations
SUPERVISOR OF A DEPARTMENTWilmot & Hockers book, Negotiating For Mutual Gains point out Fisher and Urys four practical principals. These are, 1) people, 2) interests, 3) options, and 4) criteria, which Fisher and Urys labeled all four as negotiation on merits. Wilmot & Hockers principled collaborative negotiations are heavily rooted from Fisher and Urys negotiation on merits concept. I will be using Wilmot & Hockers approaches as I analyze my understanding of the mechanics of negotiating conflicts, like the conflicts that may arise in a workplace situation. I will be using the Hostess situation as my example, my opinion is as I perceive it, and may not be accurate. I will be hypothesizing the mechanism of the potential negotiations outcomes that could have happened. Ill conclude with a short refection, this will further my understanding, and my perception as I hypothesize this example further using the Wilmot & Hockers approaches by identifying five possible reasons and offering five solutions with the tools Ive learned in class. Identify the most common reason for conflict in that workplace. 1. Management out of touch with workers. 2. Management feeling the need to protect their best interest. 3. One group against the other. 4. Workers feeling unheard. 5. Workers feeling powerless. Analyze the list in light of what you have learned in this class. 1. Hostess may have lacked effective confrontation communication skills, which

Alex Caraveo 12/2/2012 COMM 1080 Journal Assign. #4 Principled Negotiations

the workers see as an employer who is out of touch with its work force, 2. The idea of protecting ones own best interest may arise from the broken link called dialogue. 3. This lack of dialogue loss tends to promote the groups mentality to group against one another. 4. The cycle continues with one group reorganized but continue to feeling misunderstood and their message unheard. 5. The four horsemen are near, not a good sign, either group may feel powerless and the situation is continually aggravated. Advise you would give to the supervisor about conflict management. I would offer Stuarts conflict containment model, where Hostess could get and give feedback. Employees, and Hostess can both pitch their needs and ideas, this is the beginning of dialogue and creating an atmosphere where each side can feel equal in power. This leads to an important step, moving forward away from the past. The communication link called dialogue leads to seeking solutions in small steps, separating the problem from the groups with the focus on goals of workers and Hostess without current positions, and the promotion of their goals, creating objective approach, thus moving to the collaborative approach. ReflectionCommunication can set the groundwork, weather paved or rocky. Once you find yourself on a not so paved road, its up to you, (if you can) to quickly negotiate the path. Rocky roads or conflicts are part of life, we all find ourselves there. Hostess and its employees

Alex Caraveo 12/2/2012 COMM 1080 Journal Assign. #4 Principled Negotiations

should have considered implementing negotiation on merits and could have been potentially headed down the paved road, starting with the phases or path of competitive and on to collaborative. This path of principled negotiation focuses on the separation of problem and people, focus on each groups interests and not their positions, and the ability to come up with an array of options with the use of objective criteria. In my examples of Hostess vs. employee, it was just that, one group against the other. This approach, I hypothesize a lack of proper communication from each groups interests and needs, eventually both groups lost, and eventually Hostess doing its best to retain its interests while still in power may have been predicted the path that the employees would take. Hostess, knowing that at the moment the workers got a little bit of power it would intoxicate them. This drunken state of mind, to force Hostess to their demands was is just as bad if not worse than a greedy company. Yet it was this power over Hostess that lead to the employees loosing everything, including their pensions. Yet, Hostess anticipated their greed months if not years in advance, knew that the power thirsty employees would somehow be the cause of their own destruction. On the same hand, is it fair to say that this kind of thinking was wrong by Hostess and essentially Hostesses premonition was essentially spoon-feed to the employees? One could argue both sides, but overall the lack of communication and negotiation by both sides got them both in a lose/lose situation. Unfortunately some are better prepared to deal with the path ahead, someone who understands the mechanism of principled negotiation?

Alex Caraveo 12/2/2012 COMM 1080 Journal Assign. #4 Principled Negotiations

Reference: Some information was retrieved from Power Points & lectures. Wilmot & Hocker. Negotiating For Mutual Gains, pp.258-269