Enhance Negotiating Power

.. edgeable about the constructive processes of negotiations. Chapter Three is Strauss on how collaborative problem solving stresses the value of inclusivity. Meaning to develop a step-by-step process of resolving problems, rather than jumping to solutions too quickly. In designing a consensus-based process the first principle is including all people in position of making decisions into the process.

The second step in designing a consensus is that you agree on what the problem is. The key to a successful collaborative plan is to first find the causes of the problem before deciding the solutions. People must feel they are a part of the process that is they own it and it must be easy for outsiders to join the process and contribute. The process must also be open and visible to everyone involved. The people involved must be open to learning new skills so they can teach them later.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The consensus-building process allows solutions to be developed and applied that wouldnt normally be developed under ordinary conditions. In general part two is about creating awareness of how different participants perceive the problem and helping to change locked-in, unproductive habits and applying the problem-solving frameworks to organizations. Frank Sanders introduces alternative dispute resolutions mechanisms and the ways in which they can be further implemented into the court system. He uses three concepts to examine disputes and their resolution: the dispute pyramid, the process spectrum, and inside- the- court and outside-the-court mechanisms. The dispute pyramid is an inverted pyramid (43).

At the top of pyramid is perceived injurious experiences, that is a person feels hurt by someone. The next level is the person who is responsible for the hurt, hence the grievance. Next is the claim the person hurt makes against the culprit. The last level is the dispute between the parties. What is learned from the dispute pyramid is that courts can only resolve a small proportion of peoples perceived injurious experiences. The process spectrum is another useful tool in examining the dispute resolution process.

(46) As one moves along the spectrum from right to left, third party involvement increases. At the extreme right end there is avoidance which is comparable with the level of the dispute pyramid at which a person decides not to voice a claim (46). The most common form of dispute resolution is bargaining or negotiation. There is increased third-party involvement in the resolution as you move along the spectrum from negotiation to mediation and finally to adjudication. There are essentially three types of adjudication in courts, arbitration, and that in administrative agencies (46). The key point of the process spectrum is that mediation will attempt to explore the interests of each disputant and then come up with a resolution that fits the situation. Some of the regularly used outside-the-court dispute resolution mechanisms are: labor arbitration, commercial arbitration, consumer protection mechanisms, internal grievance mechanisms in prison and hospitals, media complaint mechanisms, private divorce mediation, and environmental mediation (50).

There are at least five reasons why cases do not settle out of court. One is the parties have different information and facts. Second is the parties might have the same information but feels it has a better chance to win in court. The third reason is the client and lawyer do not see the information the same and the client wont settle. Sometimes the client will settle but the lawyer allows the case to drag on through.

The fourth reason is the defendant feels he has the upper hand and drags the process to a crawl in order to win better terms. The final reason is people allow their emotions to get involved and are only out to prove the other wrong. There are two categories of mechanisms that courts can use to resolve issues and reduce cases: categorical referral and individual referral. Categorical referral is a mechanism by which the legislature takes certain categories of cases out of the courts and requires that an attempt be made to resolve them through other mechanism (52). Court-annexed arbitration is one of the more common used mechanisms of categorical referral.

Some of the cases required to go through this process include: personal inquiry, malpractice, consumer, and other money claim cases below a certain dollar amount and are held outside the courtroom. Individual referral mechanisms include mediation (sometimes through a special master), neutral experts, and minitrials and summary jury trials (54). Special masters do three things: they find facts, supervise the implementation of the decision and resolve complex multiparty dispute. A neutral expert is used when there is a technical question that is preventing the resolution of a case (55). Minitrial is an informal trial created by lawyers who have ran up court fees for years and need a fast resolution. The trial would essentially be an information exchange between the top officials of each party and would last for a set period of time which is usually a day.

A summary trial is similar to a minitrial except that there is a mock six-person jury (56). All of these mechanisms involve taking different components and putting them together in some creative way to produce a negotiation process. The significance is that they can be manipulate in a way to fit particular cases; and parties and the new process can best suit the situation. Chapter Ten of Part Three deals with role of gender in negotiation and the dilemmas that women face in negotiating. (149) Kolb develops two themes, the first arguing from existing feminist literature, describes what a womans voice in negotiation might sound like if given the opportunity and setting, women might create an alternative structure and process in public negotiation(149).

The new voice would open up the negotiation process and be heard loud and clear and greatly differ from the male dominant views of negotiation. (149) The second theme relates to the typical situation where the voice is not only hushed but the speaker is open to compromise and exploitation. To the degree that negotiation signals conflict and competing interests, a situation often at odds with the voice she speaks, women may experience anxiety and fraudulence in that place. These feelings compounded by her demeanor and style of communication may impact and sometimes impair her efficacy at the bargaining table (149). Women need to become better at expressing their voices and having it recognized for what it is there voice of negotiation.

They need to try a variety of presentation modes and find their own voice at the table so they can be fully recognized in the negotiation process and add a new perspective to the negotiation process to benefit all. All of these mechanisms and negotiation styles list in detail above can help enhance your negotiating power at the table. Negotiation power is the ability to persuade someone to do something the way you see fit and having a good BATNA, working relationship, complete understanding of both sides of the issue and a grasp of how to coordinate your resources are all great ways of enhancing your negotiating power. Negotiation : Strategies for Mutual Gain, is a collection of key ideas and process strategies about negotiating and resolving disputes more efficiently. This book is for all people of all lifestyles and all purposes whether at work, home or a peace treaty in the Middle East, these methods can work any place were negotiations ideas prove useful.

Hall,Lavinia. Negotiation:Strategies for Mutual Gain. Sage Publ. New York 1993 p.205 Political Issues Essays.