The Mayor (Theresa) is involved in multiple conflicts with the prominent local environmentalist group, Proper Plinkton, The Department of Conservation and the Extremely Sporty Plinkton. The feuds are over a cycle of dreadful incidences that transpired at the Plinkton tournament because of the Mayor trying to beautify Accidental Bay, Plinkton’s main beach where the “Beached As” Volleyball Series took place. The flawed incidences consisted of, the colour of the sand not being the natural grey of the area plus the Mayor did not consulted with the community at large about agreeing for such a change. The marine life in the harbour is said to have been affected from the moment of the first sand dumping and continued to have ongoing constant effects. Lastly ESP was in all sorts of difficulties, the athletes had lesions and infections on their skin and the athletes also complained about the coarseness of the sand, leading to withdrawal of a team from the remaining tournaments of the series. Furthermore, the contracted price for TV coverage was out of proportion to the actual revenue achieved. Lastly, the CEO of “Beached As” announced that Plinkton’s future as a venue for the series was terminated.
Suggestions: How the parties might best reach an agreed outcome
According to Findlaw Corporation, negotiation is a collaborative process that occurs whenever one party wants something from another: Negotiation is a conversation intended to settle disputes, or to identify outcomes that appease various interests. Negotiation is therefore a course of communicating back and forth for reaching a joint decision.
Negotiation involves three fundamentals, namely; process, behaviour and substance. Process is how the strategy used by the parties plus the series and stages in which all of strategies plays out: Behaviour is the communication technique among the parties: Substance is the plan, the difficulties, the alternatives and the compromise reached at the end.
As stated by Findlaw Corporation, practical strategy and planning are pivotal critical foundations for achieving negotiation goals: Lack of practical planning and target setting, makes it impossible to reach desired results. According to Krantcents, not assigning ample time to planning is a gap that may cause failure.
There are two avenues of negotiation, namely; principled and positional approaches. The prospects of both approaches can be used in negotiation.
Principled negotiation is defined as an interest-based approach that focusses on conflict management and conflict resolution: It is also said to be suitable when there are multiple issues rather than a single-issue.
As stated above, in the Beached As scenario, there multiple issues to be addressed. Swarm Thoughts states that positional negotiation is a method that holds on a fixed idea or position regardless of any underlying interests.
Outline: Advice regarding the negotiation strategy to use
Helpguide advise that negotiation entails being clear about one’s objectives and to comprehend the position of the other party: It also involves offering and accepting proposals to reach an agreement.
According to Brown and Marriott, awareness of basic communication techniques and strategies on how to communicate in challenging situations is advantageous. It is critical to prepare beforehand to respond effectively to tactics, whenever they arise: In constructing strategies to counter such behaviour, each situation must be viewed individually.
Explain: The benefits of the above strategy
According to Fisher Ury and Patton, those who involved in the negotiation would steadily hold their side’s positions and make quick response to other side’s activity: Consequently, the issues between two sides always arise from their assessment, emotion, and communication. Fisher, Ury and Patton advise that position is something that parties decide upon; interests are what causes parties: The aim of negotiation is to reach agreement by focusing on each side’s interests, rather than their positions. People generally think that negotiation is about the position rather than the communication: Hence the tendency is to take advantageous position in the negotiation to accomplish the goal.
As stated by Fisher, Ury and Patton, in the Github, should both parties concentrate on interest, it is easier to then invent options for mutual benefits: This reciprocal perspective is the main difference from the win-lose path. According to Fisher, Ury and Patton 2011), each party should seek new solutions of the conflict which are positive to both sides. Before reaching the agreement and solutions of the conflict, Fisher, Ury and Patton, suggest that various solutions can de established by brainstorming. Through that process all parties could view mutual gains in Github.
According to Fisher, Ury and Patton, when the concerns are totally opposed between two parties, the negotiation technique might tend to be problematic. Using a decision basis that is independent of either side is always useful. Resolution based on principle make it easier for both parties to achieve the agreement.
Reasons: For outline above
Negotiation is a critical process and therefore should be managed with great care: It is about getting the best possible deal in the best possible way. Principled negotiation allows for the prospect of creative options and solutions that can benefit both parties. With a positional approach the aim will be more on claiming as much value as possible with a focus on the financial sum alone. With a principled approach the Mayor could propose other options such as providing an apology to the residents of Plinkton to address her action to beautify the beach without consultation, this would assist in settling the negotiation. This option is unimaginable under a purely positional approach.
There are advantages in pursuing early settlement to issues. If left to escalate, the issues and conflict mount and if parties involved are resistant to consider common outcome benefits, the matter leads towards an expensive legal dispute.
Negotiation is the most adaptable form of dispute resolution because it involves only those parties with some concerns in the matter and their representatives. Negotiations have a greater chance of achievement when the parties embrace an interest-based approach as opposed to a positional based approach. Negotiations is strictly an independent process: None is forced to participate in negotiations should they wish not to do so. There is no need for appeal to a third-party neutral. The result of a negotiation only compels those parties who are involved in negotiation: Negotiation will furnish the parties with the prospect to design an agreement which echoes their interests. Negotiations maintain and, in some cases, boost the relationship between the parties once an agreement has been reached between them.
In the likely event that negotiation results in a deadlock, mediation is an option that could be explored: Mediation has value in that it provides a third party who could assist in a settlement agreement while also having a process that is mutual.
A settlement at Mediation avoids litigation which invariably involves consequential time and cost: Mediation is a private process, and this avoids any reputational damage from negative publicity that normally arises from litigation.
This would be a benefit Plinkton and the Mayor who will want to minimise any reputational damage.
Mediation may avoid the considerable emotional and psychological costs that can be associated with litigation. A facilitative style of mediation assists in dealing with the underlying interests, issues or behaviour that may have been a barrier preventing a negotiation settlement. Analysing the parties’ interests and developing options for mutual gain will yet be available with a third party to facilitate a settlement.
In an evaluative mediation the reality of what would be associated with an oppositional process can be established. Mediation can be a beneficial option until the beginning of a hearing.
However, when mediation does not result in settlement it can add more time and cost to a discord that advances to litigation. Should there be no settlement this can be perceived by the parties as a failure in another process. Nonetheless a mediation that results in no full settlement can yet add value to resolving the feud by agreeing to some facts and issues resulting in a drop in the time and cost of litigation and any future mediation.
According to Spiller, the features of a competitive negotiation is that it places pressure on the other party: Positional negotiating aims at being more fixed to the extent that the focus on a position can make it problematic for a party to move.
Ultimately, the rigid position might be outside the other party’s Zone of Potential Agreement.
Settlement mediation model is an option; but this is not related to a positional style of negotiation: It could be used if both parties agree that the only issue is financial.
In some cases, parties may not be of equal power therefore the weaker party/ies may be at a disadvantage. As Cloke, advises, for negotiation to be successful, there is need for each party to have a clear understanding of its negotiating mandate. It is further stated that if ambiguity exists regarding the boundaries of a party’s negotiating command, the party will be unable to engage effectively in the bargaining process.
The lack of a neutral third party can result in parties being unable to make progress towards a solution. Furthermore, some matters are not amenable to negotiation. Seemingly, there is no chance of an agreement where the parties are divided by opposing philosophies which leave no room for common concessions.
The negotiation process therefore, cannot certify the good faith of any of the parties: In some cases negotiation may be used as a slowing tactic to prevent another party from asserting its rights through litigation or arbitration.