Tag Archive for: StrategiesModule

NCM512 – Negotiation StrategiesModule 5 – BackgroundCollaborative or Principled Negotiation.trident.

NCM512 – Negotiation StrategiesModule 5 – BackgroundCollaborative or Principled Negotiation.trident.

NCM512 – Negotiation StrategiesModule 5 – BackgroundCollaborative or Principled Negotiation.trident.edu/CourseHomeModule.aspx?course=302&term=109&module=5&page=home”>.trident.edu/CourseHomeModule.aspx?course=302&term=109&module=5&page=bkg”>.trident.edu/CourseHomeModule.aspx?course=302&term=109&module=5&page=case”>.trident.edu/CourseHomeModule.aspx?course=302&term=109&module=5&page=slp”>.trident.edu/CourseHomeModule.aspx?course=302&term=109&module=5&page=objectives”>Library Instructions:To access articles in the Library, please follow these steps:Login to CourseNet at.trident.edu/”>https://coursenet.trident.edu/On the left hand navigation pane under Resources, select “Library Portal.â€From there, you will be directed to the Touro College Library database. If you know the database in which your article is located, then select that database to start your search.If you cannot locate an article in one set of databases (e.g., EBSCO), try to locate it in ProQuest.Please review the following materials in this order and access via ProQuest where no link is provided:Updated: Winter 13Shachar, M. (2011) Conflict Resolution Management (CRM)..trident.edu/Presentation.aspx?course=302&term=109&presentation=114450″>Text Book. Chapter 9.For a Power Point Presentation.trident.edu/Presentation.aspx?course=302&term=109&presentation=114446″>Click here!Readings – access via Proquest or provided link:Wall, B. M. (2010). Conflict and Compromise: Catholic and Public Hospital Partnerships.Nursing History Review. New York:2010. Vol. 18, p. 100-117 (18 pp.)Bustard, D.W. (2002). An Experience of Principled Negotiation in Requirements Engineering. Australian Workshop on Requirements Engineering (AWRE’2002) . Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from:.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-69/paper05.pdf”>..informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-69/paper05.pdf”>http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-69/paper05.pdfNCM512 – Negotiation StrategiesModule 5 – CaseCollaborative or Principled NegotiationPrincipled NegotiationsThe decision to collaborate is not a simple one to take. It may seem plausible and it may be the right choice to make.But how can we even think about working together towards an agreed solution, when the heart is pumping furiously and emotions are at their extreme, or when we have two or more entities each fully assured that only THEIR way is the right way?The answer is simple – we need to ask ourselves: “what purpose will it serve?”If collaboration will create the most advantageous options for us, and provide for optimal mutual gains, than we must proceed along that path, and put aside all other considerations and emotions.The following articles are unique, as they account for the utilization (concept, approach and process) of PN to resolving well a conflict. Please read:1. Wall, B. M. (2010). Conflict and Compromise: Catholic and Public Hospital Partnerships.Nursing History Review. New York:2010. Vol. 18, p. 100-117 (18 pp.)2. Bustard, D.W. (2002).An Experience of Principled Negotiation in Requirements Engineering. Australian Workshop on Requirements Engineering (AWRE’2002) . Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia..informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-69/paper05.pdf”>click here:.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-69/paper05.pdf”>http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-69/paper05.pdfThe Case AssignmentAfter carefully reading through these articles, CHOOSE ONE OF THEM, and answer (in at least four pages), the following questions:What were the major points that made PN the EFFECTIVE method of choice (relative to other options) for your chosen case study?Can this approach be emulated in and to other environments? Present an example.ExpectationsPlease, donotsummarize the article, but rather point out the PN concept and process.I want to see YOUR opinions and thoughts supported by the readingsPlease present how each principle wasimplementedto this case. NCM512 – Negotiation StrategiesModule 5 – SLPCollaborative or Principled NegotiationModule 5 – SLP – Collaborative or Principled NegotiationExpectations and IntroductionThe intent of the SLP is for you toapplythe theoretical and general aspects covered in each module, toreal-life and practicalcases.Conflict is an integral part of our lives, and we encounter it in every aspect of our personal and professional activities.Surely, you have observed (or even participated in) some form of conflict at your workplace, be it a simple but heated interpersonal matter, or a full-scale organizational dispute.The SLP will always have three short parts you will need to address in EACH module, as described below.Focusshould be put on sections II + III.As each module deals with a different topic, you can choose on describing and analyzing the same conflict in all modules, or widening your scope and describing different incidents.Part I – Background and Settings (in about ½ a page):The Organization – Without revealing proprietary information, describe the organization of your choice (It should be one that you are familiar with, so preferably it would be easier, if it would be your own).The Conflict – Describe the workplace conflict issue you have chosen to write about.o What is the underlying problem or difference?o Who are the parties or sides in this conflict?Choose a Side – Choose one of the parties or sides in the conflict and let me know of your choice.Part II – How was it Negotiated? (in about 1 full page):Describe “your chosen” side’s decisions and/or behaviors and/or actions to the following:o PN – Was the Principled Negotiation (PN) method, used in your case? If so, how? If not, could it have been implemented? how would it have benefited the two sides?o Principles – How were the four principles of PN, carried out? If PN was not used, could it have been beneficial?o BATNA – What was your side’s BATNA? Was there a case where it was “activated”? If No BATNA was prepared, discuss this in Part III.Part III – What Would You Have Done? (in about 1 full page):Assuming you are the principal representative for your “chosen side”:o What would YOU have done in this case to solve the issue?o What decisions would YOU have taken?NCM512 – Negotiation Strategies