The second approach to bargaining is integrative bargaining which looks for win-win solutions, or outcomes in which both sides benefit. In other words it is negotiations between a union and management when the parties are not in direct conflict over an issue, and when both stand to benefit from continued discussions. An example of integrative bargaining is trying to decide how to split an orange between two students. One students wants the peel the orange to make preserve and the other student would like to make orange juice. In this situation, I think both of the students can benefit without losing out.
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Despite attempting to predict the eventual outcome of the negotiation, I did not anticipate the confrontations between Local H-56 and the management of Hotel Zinnia. Although they initially agreed to engage in integrative bargaining, the union and management subsequently entered an intense negotiation. When Local H-56 presented its proposal of wage increases and health insurance, management immediately responded with a counterproposal that surprised the union. Both the union and management eventually behaved confrontationally, accusing each other of bargaining unreasonably and focusing on the trivial aspects of the negotiation. Moreover, as the union and management felt increasingly frustrated, they suffered from a lack of unity in their teams. The union could not fulfill its objectives because its lead negotiator prevented other team members from contributing to the negotiation. On the other hand, several team members of management struggled to assert their authority as the lead negotiator. After observing these issues, I ultimately believe that the union and management failed to achieve their individual objectives. Moreover, by approaching the negotiation with a zero-sum strategy, I assert that the union and management failed to reach a mutually beneficial contract. At the same time, both sides of the bargaining table lacked cohesive teams and therefore struggled under the pressure of the negotiation.
The dynamic of a win-lose bargaining situation can cause negotiations to be exceedingly tense and volatile because only one side will gain at the end of these type of negotiations. This makes the concept of distributive bargaining controversial. Michael Wheeler, the author of the article, Three cheers for teaching distributive bargaining, discusses how many professors at an academy of management conference disapproved of distributive bargaining negotiation tactics. Wheeler explains, a huge majority of the attendees disapproved of exposing their impressionable pupils to the reality that in some negotiations, more for one party means less for the other” (Wheeler, 2012).
The first common theme is the importance of clear strategic intent and big picture thinking in negotiations. Before taking the Negotiation Behaviour unit, I always perceived negotiation as a fixed-pie, a zero-sum gain situation, where one party wins and the other party loses. This belief has often led me to a competitive behaviour in negotiation by trading the big picture thinking with the need to win, getting too detailed too quickly, leading to a positional approach instead of having a broad goal and explore for ways around problems to create value and get the best outcome.
Principled negotiation allows disputants to obtain what they are entitled to, while enabling them to be fair, at the same time protecting against those who would take advantage of their fairness . Although the points made are logical and indeed a great approach to certain types of conflict, I found that in some cases the method did not completely come together. More than anything, I found the method altogether was simplistic and for an ideal situation. While going through the four elements, I shall illustrate these points.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2006). Negotiation: Readings, Exercises and Cases (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
In order to make collective bargaining successful unions, and their members, must reach a greater understanding of all aspects and conditions with the company that employs the members. Concessions must be made on both ends to achieve a result that is satisfactory and improving. Common grounds for agreement include wages, hours, and the conditions in the workplace. Occasionally, when concessions can’t be reached strikes may result.
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
The negotiation revolved around three main individuals, Terry Hardel, Josephine McNair, and Joe Abernathy. For this negotiation, my partner played the part of Joe while I played Terry. We were both given the same general instructions. However, an additional set of secret instructions were given to each of us separately.
Integrative negotiation is often referred to as ‘win-win’ and typically entails two or more issues to be negotiated. It often involves an agreement process that better integrates the aims and goals of all the involved negotiating parties through creative and collaborative problem solving. Relationship is usually more important, with more complex issues being negotiated than with Distributive Negotiation. Integrative negotiation is the process of defining these goals and engaging in a process that permits both parties to maximize their objectives.
Negotiation approaches are generally described as either distributive or integrative. At the heart of each strategy is a measurement of conflict between each party’s desired outcomes. Consider the following situation. Chris, an entrepreneur, is starting a new business that will occupy most of his free time for the near future. Living in a fancy new development, Chris is concerned that his new business will prevent him from taking care of his lawn, which has strict requirements under neighborhood rules. Not wanted to upset his neighbors, Chris decides to hire Matt to cut his grass.
The collective bargaining simulation was a good educational experience for me. We were able to apply the concepts we learned throughout the semester to a real life situation. I was assigned the role of Chief Negotiator for the bargaining unit. This role fit me well because I have studied unions prior to this semester and I got to meet with multiple people from different unions last year. This experience helped me get the perspective of the average member and I learned about some of the expectations they have for the union. Members of the union expect their chief negotiator to fight for all of their benefits and never settle for anything that doesn’t benefit the union. I tried my best to get all of the demands we were assigned approved. According to my notes we were able to get most of our demands and we denied the demands of the employer that we didn’t agree with. I enjoyed this role because I was able to stay engage in the activity the whole time. I think it would have been difficult for me to have a different role other than the assistant negotiator, because all of the other positions didn’t have as much responsibility. Being
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin
Godfrey et al. (2014) refer to collective bargaining as a confrontational process that involves negotiation between conflicting parties in order to find a mutually acceptable agreement. The LRA acknowledges trade unions and employers’ organisations as representatives of employers and employees by providing them with specific organisational rights as well as methods to create forums in which bargaining can take place (Grogan 2015).