MAN4441 Rasmussen College Preserving the Relationship Scenario Analysis Previous assignments attached. Please make it good, this teacher grades hard. rom

MAN4441 Rasmussen College Preserving the Relationship Scenario Analysis Previous assignments attached. Please make it good, this teacher grades hard.

rom the beginning of this course, you’ve learned how an integrative bargaining approach to a negotiation is preferable when the parties want to preserve a relationship. In our project scenario, Michelle wants to continue working at the call center, and more importantly wants to maintain the good working relationship that she has cultivated with her boss, Nikki. Neither party wants the schedule dispute to derail that relationship. Nikki knows that Michelle has started bad mouthing her to the other employees because she thinks that Nikki’s approach to scheduling people based on seniority was a lazy rather than fair. Michelle’s emotions were running high when she did this, but unfortunately the remarks started to damage Nikki’s reputation as being a good supervisor. As a result, the relationship between the supervisor and employee is now strained.

For this final part of the project you will address the following questions in your paper:

Analyze and discuss the critical role of reputation, trust, and fairness as it pertains to this situation.
After meeting and discussing the issue, the two women were able to work out a schedule for Michelle that would solve her daycare issues and would be fair to the other employees. Now that the issue has been resolved, based on your readings, synthesize a plan for how the two women can work towards rebuilding their relationship.

In your paper, follow standard mechanics in grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Running Head: NEGOTIATION PLANNING
Negotiation Planning
Bria Jones
Rasmussen College
Negotiation and Conflict Management
August 20, 2019
1
NEGOTIATION PLANNING
Integrative negotiation is also referred to us the win-win negotiation. Integrative negation
is a strategy which parties involved work together to a win-win solution to their quarrel. The
main aim of this strategy is to develop a mutual advantageous covenant depending on the
concern of the disputants, while on the other hand distributive bargaining is a reasonable
bargaining strategy whereby one party will gain only if the other party loses something.
Distributive negotiation strategy is utilized in distributing a fixed resource like money, assets as
well as resources among the parties involved. Both distributive and integrative negotiations have
some merits as well as a demerit.
One of the major demerits with integrative negotiation is that since it involves a win-win
situation at the end, offering something and not gaining anything at the end becomes a demerit of
the negotiation. All the clients involved ought to have a clear understanding that if they want all
then there is something that they will have to give so that it can be win-win for both parties but
the moment one fails to deliver then it becomes a demerit (Harrington, Dworkin,Withers, Onono,
Kwena, & Newmann, 2016). Another demerit is that you find out that one of the parties is
offering a lower quotation on an average commodity while the other party is offering a higher
price with an assurance of a good product. Most of the clients may opt to choose the lower price
commodity but with low quality which symbolizes that the owner is the only one who has won
and not both hence becoming a demerit. On the other hand, one of the merits of integrative
negotiation is that it focuses on establishing a long term relationship as well as facilities working
as a team shortly.
Moreover, we also have the distributive negotiation which also has some demerits such
that it focuses on short terms goals of working with the other party. Also on the other hand
distributive. Also, there is some conflict doggedness who believes that distributive bargaining is
2
NEGOTIATION PLANNING
not necessary. It has also been noted that since distributive negotiation tends to result in
destructive actions as well as at times forces the parties involved focusing on their disparities
which are not supposed to be the case. But apart from that distributive negotiation also has got
some merits whereby in circumstances where the negotiator requires reducing the value attained
in a single deal as when the relationship with the other party is not vital then distributive
negotiation will be of great merit at that point.
After having a clear comparison between the two negations tactics Michelle needs to opt
for integrative negotiation. There is also some issue which Michelle is undergoing and due to
this, it forms the backbone as to why she has to go with integrative negation. Michelle is not able
to obtain good daycare since she is a single mother. Apart from that Michelle is suffering from
lack of work and life balance. Also on the other hand bearing in mind that negotiation has to take
place then there is always a need to recognize the interest of both parties. One of the major
interests of both parties is that there is a need for timely attendance. Also according to the case
of Michelle adhering in times of work is another interest for both parties (Fuller, & Putnam,
2016). Having no absenteeism or minimal absenteeism is also another major interest between
both parties. There are also some of the resistance points. Change ought to be made on the other
members of staff schedules. Also, there is a flashback coming from the other members of staff
also requesting the changes to their shifts. On the Michelle plan, there is also her alternatives as
well as for BATNA. According to Michelle, her best alternative is that if the management
doesn’t concur to her request then she opts to come along with her child to work. But on another
thought, Michelle can be able to request for the provision of additional payments for her to be
able to meet her wants of offering great care to her child. The opening bids, as well as Michelle’s
objectives, are as follows. Michelle will have first to give a clear explanation as to why she is
3
NEGOTIATION PLANNING
searching for a change in shift. Michelle can provide the information to the management on how
the changes in the shift are resulting in a huge impact on her individual life as well as childcare.
Michelle ought then to wait for the management to also provide their perspective and be able to
see what they can also bring to the table.
Below are the constituents as well as the social context which negotiation will take place.
The discussion will happen with Nikki plus the human resource manager representative
who is available. Since this is the concern with the shift timing, there will be a need for the
presence of the senior operational manager. Analysis of the other party which is Nikki or the
management may not come into terms with Michelle regarding her change to shift timing. This is
because the other workers may have concerns with the changes in shifts, even though a diverse
plan was developed earlier on (Yahia, Ayadi, & Masmoudi, 2017). For the organization to avoid
conflicts within the organization they may not agree to her request of change in a shift but they
take into consideration that Michelle to be allowed to come with her child to work.
4
NEGOTIATION PLANNING
Reference
Fuller, R. P., & Putnam, L. L. (2016). Planning for a Negotiation. In Stretching Boundaries:
Cases in Organizational and Managerial Communication (pp. 161-166). Routledge.
Harrington, E. K., Dworkin, S., Withers, M., Onono, M., Kwena, Z., & Newmann, S. J. (2016).
Gendered power dynamics and women’s negotiation of family planning in a high HIV
prevalence setting: a qualitative study of couples in western Kenya. Culture, health &
sexuality, 18(4), 453-469.
Yahia, W. B., Ayadi, O., & Masmoudi, F. (2017). A fuzzy-based negotiation approach for
collaborative planning in manufacturing supply chains. Journal of Intelligent
Manufacturing, 28(8), 1987-2006.
Lewicki, Roy, Bruce Barry, David Saunders. Essentials of Negotiation.. [Bookshelf
Ambassadored].
5
Running head: THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL
The Conflict Gets Personal
Bria Jones
Rasmussen College
September 3, 2019
1
THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL
2
The Conflict Gets Personal
Question one
There are several interests, rights and power related issues that are driving the conflict
between Michelle and Nikki. These issues are sensitive and if not controlled, can increase the
conflict and turn it into a serious problem beyond control. Clearly, Michelle emotions have been
provoked because she must switch shifts and find new daycare, something she is not happy about
it. Although Nikki knows that Michelle is not happy with the change in the shift, she does not
understand the reasons behind it. Nikki believes that her position, rights and powers interests are
being ignored, in part because Michele does not seem to understand Nikki’s needs. Michele has
a right to be given time to take care of her child without losing her job. Michelle is also unhappy
with the fact that some employees are getting preferential treatment in the workplace. Nikki on
the other hand must ensure smooth flow of operations and that there is timely attendance. Her
interests are geared towards workplace productivity and she has the powers to impose her
judgment as a manager.
Question two
Biases can have detrimental outcomes in a negotiation process especially when parties
bring prejudgments about the other party. One of the most common types of biases is
stereotypes, which is a general assumption concerning a group of people who share similar
characteristics. In the current case, Nikki is biased towards a particular section of employees who
include Michelle. According to Nikki, this section of employees is continuous nuisance to the
organization despite having worked at the call center for a longer time. Another bias applicable
THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL
3
in the conflict between Nikki and Michelle is the selective and confirmation bias, which occurs
when managers pay attention to a section of available information while ignoring the rest (Liu,
Liu & Zhang, 2016). If a manager develops a bad image of a person, he might be more likely to
pay attention to bad behaviours of the individual and pay little attention to behaviour that might
contradict his opinion. Nikki might be focusing on the need for timely attendance and increased
productivity in the workplace while ignoring the fact that Michelle needs balance between work
and life. It is likely that Nikki looks at the detrimental effects of Michelle’s problem of
workplace productivity without considering the situation Michelle is facing.
Question three
Dealing with a person whose emotions are running high can be a challenging thing to do.
In the current case, Michele appears to be losing her patience and her emotions are getting the
best of her. There are several strategies that Nikki can use to neutralize Michelle’s emotions, but
the most important thing is to ensure good communication during the negotiation process
(Bonaccio, O’Reilly & O’Sullivan et al., 2016). First, Nikki must be careful with her words to
ensure they are not only appropriate, but also carefully designed to ensure Michelle is not
emotionally provoked. Second, Nikki should pay close attention to the desires and interests of
Michelle by learning to be a good a listener. This way, Michelle will be able to out her
frustrations and express her needs and feel satisfied that someone is listening. Because negative
emotions can be toxic, Nikki must be careful not to get emotional. She must remain calm and
control her emotions to avoid escalating the problem into something more serious and
unmanageable. Fifth, eye contact is important to let Michelle know that she is engaged even
when not speaking. The sixth strategy to dealing with Michelle’s emotions is ensuring the right
body position. Sometimes, people send the wrong message because of not minding how they sit
THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL
4
and during negotiation. Lastly, Nikki should engage in solid questioning in order to fully explore
Michelle’s interests and frustration and fully understand her frustrations.
THE CONFLICT GETS PERSONAL
5
References
Bonaccio, S., O’Reilly, J., O’Sullivan, S. L., & Chiocchio, F. (2016). Nonverbal behavior and
communication in the workplace: A review and an agenda for research. Journal of
Management, 42(5), 1044-1074.
Liu, W., Liu, L. A., & Zhang, J. D. (2016). How to dissolve fixed ?pie bias in negotiation? Social
antecedents and the mediating effect of mental?model adjustment. Journal of
organizational behavior, 37(1), 85-107.
Lewicki, Roy, Bruce Barry, David Saunders. Essentials of Negotiation.. [Bookshelf
Ambassadored].
Running head: POWER AND NEGOTIATION
Power and Negotiation
Bria Jones
Rasmussen College
POWER AND NEGOTIATION
Power and Negotiation
Question one
Nikki and Michelle are both employees to the organization. However, Michelle’s powers
are subordinate to Nikki’s. This is because she is answerable to Nikki who is the manager to the
company. Just to mention, Nikki’s powers are derived from his position as the manager of the
organization Brett, J., & Thompson, L. (2016). He is mandated to make and enforce some of the
rules governing the organization. Besides solving issues rising form the employees, Nikki also
ensures that everything runs as scheduled. Michelle is intending to negotiate with him to have
duty schedule adjustment because of the inherent family issues she is facing. Michelle posse’s
referent type of power because she is an employee of the organization (Roloff, 2015). As such,
she is legible to negotiate with Nikki without any form of fear. She is at the forefront of enabling
the organization to achieve its core business objectives.
Question two
Michelle is in a lesser power position; she is required to organize her negotiation skills
with a lot of consciousness to avoid losing the argument. Just to mention, she is supposed to
ensure that her interests are articulately appropriately to avoid any form of misunderstanding
with Nikki, the organization’s manager. Michelle should begin by finding her Best Alternative
To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) (Sebenius, 2017). Furthermore, she should articulate her
negotiation targets in reference to the adjustment of the shift schedule. On the other hand,
Michelle should determine Nikki’s key targets for negotiation session. This will give her more
bargaining power for her interests. Lastly but not least, she is supposed to also understand
Nikki’s BATNA to come up with the best-articulated argument that will allow her to get the
schedule adjustment to solve her inherent family problems.
POWER AND NEGOTIATION
References
Brett, J., & Thompson, L. (2016). Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 136, 68-79.
Roloff, M. E. (2015). Power and Negotiation. The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal
Communication, 1-10.
Sebenius, J. K. (2017). BATNA s in Negotiation: Common Errors and Three Kinds of “No”.
Negotiation Journal, 33(2), 89-99.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment