Welcome to Online Homework Market

PART 1: Each one needs to 150-180 words: DQ1. Considering

PART 1: Each one needs to 150-180 words:

DQ1. Considering a situation, in which you were involved, explain a time when negotiation efforts were effective.

DQ 2: Considering a hypothetical situation, describe a scenario when negotiation efforts would be considered ineffective.

DQ 3: What types of situations do you think involve multiple parties, in negotiations?


PART 2: Replies: Reply to each classmate 150 – 160 words

DQ 1by Henry May – Monday, 31 January 2022, 3:41 PM 

     One of the best examples of a successful negotiation that comes to mind is the securing of my current position/job. The position I was competing for is coveted within the organization that I work, and therefore very competitive. I have developed a breadth of skills, certifications, and experience during my tenure, and felt I had a competitive package. In addition, I exercised my network and was able to leverage other’s credibility for my consideration. I was fortunate enough to land an interview, which I performed well. Upon being selected, the terms of the offer were discussed at length. Pay was within the scale that I desired, the work schedule and workload was ideal, and travel was minimal, but the start date was far too soon to move across the country. What was supposed to be a 9 to 12 month lead time ended up being a matter of a few weeks. The leadership would not budge and wanted me to move myself and my family in two weeks’ time. Although this was what I considered a “dream” position, I simply would not budge and requested a minimum 6 month lead time. They withdrew the offer, and I was crushed. After informing my wife and mentally letting go of this opportunity, I received a call the next day… they were willing to work with me and met all of my requests, including start date. I fully accepted the position and terms, and began work two months ago.

     Although there was some back and forth with pay, travel, and work schedule, I was not willing to budge on a start date. When we initially suspended the negotiation, I thought there was no way that they were going to return with another offer. I ensured them that if their other candidate did not work out, that I was still interested, and that I wished we could have worked something out. Being open about why I could not accept the position, and about how I truly wanted to be able to work for them, was part of why they came back to me with an offer. It was a trying process, but in the end was an effective negotiation.

DQ 2by Henry May – Monday, 31 January 2022, 3:41 PM 

     For the purpose of this hypothetical situation, the members of a plumbing union are seeking higher pay and better medical benefits. The corporation for which the plumbers work is a large conglomerate with adequate resources, but compensates its employees at a rate lower than the industry standard in order to lower overhead and maximize profits. The union requested to meet with the leadership of the organization and requested a pay raise in line with the industry standard, and a decrease in the premiums and copay for the medical insurance the company offers. The corporation responded that the employees are adequately compensated and that insurance would not be changed. Due to the corporation response, the union threaten to strike within 15 days if they did not offer a solution. The corporation did not like being threatened and responded by offering a miniscule increase in pay, and a lower insurance copay with increased monthly medical insurance premium. The union offered one last bid with fair pay commensurate with other local and nationwide industries, and a lower insurance premium. The corporation rejected the offer, and the union went on strike. The employees are now unpaid for an undetermined amount of time, and the company is losing more money in the first week than they would have had to pay for better insurance for the year. The negotiations were ineffective.

     Mutual interests must be considered with regard to negotiation. When parties negotiating do not consider each other’s interests and offer unrealistic, or near insulting responses, trust is fractured and is difficult to recover. Working together to develop mutually beneficial outcomes brings success, while a self-centered motivation for either side will yield failure.

DQ3: by Amy Nadeau – Friday, 28 January 2022, 6:22 PM 

Many of the multiparty negotiations I think of are in the news on a daily basis. For example, the current high-stakes negotiations between the United States, Russia, Ukraine, and NATO members. This particular negotiation is a prime example of the strategic complexity that occurs in multiple party negotiations (Lewicki et al., 2020). As we all know, this situation is highly visible, which can lead one or more of the parties to adopt more distributive tactics. The parties have engaged in coalition building and tried to control the number of negotiators. Obviously, this a highly complex situation with large ramifications that most of us do not have all the facts on. However, it is a very good example of a multiple party negotiation.

Other situations that involve multiple parties are school board meetings and county board meetings. These have all the board members, a board leader and constituents representing multiple interests and perspectives. Legislatures are great examples of multiparty negotiations. With hundreds of congressional representatives that each have thousands or millions of constituents, these are understandably complex scenarios.

Lewicki, R., Barry, B., & Saunders, D.M., (2020). Negotiation (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. Retrieved from vbk://9781260479201

DQ5by Amy Nadeau – Friday, 28 January 2022, 6:20 PM 

Teams must have a game plan before sitting down at the negotiating table. Part of this plan must be aligning each persons interests within the team. To do this, the team has to be open and share their interests. Lewicki et al. (2020) suggest polling each team member first to collect that input. Then, the team can come together to plot all of their interests in work session. In doing this, the team will be able to see any conflicting interests then decide how to work them out before negotiating.

If each team member is representing constituents, their interests must be uncovered as well. Part of this is tamping down expectations about what their agent can achieve for them. In multiple party negotiations, constituents should not have over high expectations (Lewicki et al., 2020).

Lastly, each team member should share what they know and the data they have with the team. Especially is the team is cross-functional, each member will have unique expertise and data but there may be a lack of trust.  

Lewicki, R., Barry, B., & Saunders, D.M., (2020). Negotiation (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. Retrieved from vbk://9781260479201


PART 3: MGT: This needs to be 250-300 words:  

What makes someone a difficult person?   Why is this important in the workplace?

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!