Conflict resolution is a way of solving indifference. The process of resolving conflicts involves processes such as negotiating on the conflict, mediation between the two parties in dispute, and diplomacy. For conflict resolution to be successful there must be clear communication between the two parties. Solving the problem is also a successful way of resolving conflict. Altogether during the process of resolving problems, the draft agreement should be drawn down and signed by two parties. Solution agreement should not be biased to any side and should satisfy both parties. Negotiation involves a process of solving conflict through dialogue communication between parties in dispute. During negotiation, the parties in conflict should come to a concrete decision to solve the underlying dispute which should be agreed upon by both sides. The main purpose of dialogue communication during the negotiation process is to resolve the dispute and to come up with an agreement involving the dispute. Negotiation is the main and primary step to resolve conflict (Cremer, Zeelenberg & Murnighan, 2006).
tailored to your instructions
for only $13.00 $11.05/page
Integrative negotiation is the prospective for parties involved in the conflict to combine their effort as one to solve the underlying conflict between them. Integrative negotiation is a strategy to negotiate on interest-based bargaining which involves a win-win system. In integrative negotiation, the parties in conflict collaborate to solve the dispute in such a way that both sides are not favored anyway. Integrative negotiation strategy involves a decision that should mutually benefit both sides basing their interest on the solution made. Integrative negotiation strategy is of great importance in conflict resolution because its outcome is satisfying to both sides in the dispute.
Integrative negotiation strategy concerned with the interest of the two parties helps to create a more winning solution. The integrative strategy of solving conflict results in an equal outcome which creates a more satisfying way of resolving the conflict. Outcomes of integrative negotiation strategy of conflict resolution are pleasing since the needs of either side are considered (Cremer, Zeelenberg & Murnighan, 2006). It involves a team-up between the two parties which helps in resolving the conflict. Integrative negotiation strategy is of great importance in conflict resolution as it prevents any future dispute which may arise from the same conflict from any side. It creates a constructive and positive response between the parties.
Steps involved in integrative negotiation strategy involve, identifying the interest of the two parties, understanding the demands placed by the other party, working together to reach the demand of each side, and lastly analyzing the outcomes which may result from the agreement made. Identifying the interest of the other party involves placing on-table demands and interests of each side. The manager should try to figure out why his employee responded to the job applicant after the deadline? What was the problem of the late respondent on the job application and yet the applicant was aware of the deadline? On the other side, the employee should also try to understand that, although he is already an employee in the organization, there are the organization’s policies, rules, and regulations the manager should follow.
After identifying and understanding your partner’s interest, parties in conflict should work together with one goal to solve the conflict. They should come up with ideas to meet the interests and demands of each other. Using an integrative negotiation strategy to solve the conflict, the manager and employee should work together and come up with a solution that will not favor both sides. The manager should give the employee a chance for the post, while on the other side employee should know that he will be treated like any other applicant for the post and that he should not expect any favor or opportunity for the post. Managers and employees should come up with fairways to meet their needs and interest. Lastly, after coming up with solutions listed down, the two parties should analyze the outcome. They should analyze positive and negative outcomes which may arise from the agreement made. They should weigh which side is more favoring between the positive and negative side (Cremer, Zeelenberg & Murnighan, 2006). The manager should carry out an empathetic analysis of the employee’s interest to create a better negotiation agreement that will be accepted by both sides.
Of the steps discussed above, understanding each other interests and needs is the most challenging because each party wants all his interests and demand to be understood and considered. Cognitive consideration to be taken is to understand that the organization has rules, regulations, and policies to follow. That the manager agreement on giving a chance for the post would be impossible if the organization regulation demands that no application should be accepted after the deadline. The interests, demands, and reasons given for the late submission of the application should be considered if it is well convincing.
Integrative negotiation strategy involves solving the conflict by, freely sharing and discussing each side’s interests and needs, understanding each interest and needs, and finding a solution that is more satisfying on both sides. Descriptive negotiation strategy involves solving the conflict by selectively sharing information, with no understanding of your partner’s needs and interests, and finding solutions that best suits one side. The conflict between employee and manager could be solved using both integrative and descriptive negotiation strategies. This is because the employee should accept that his interest is not considered fairly that he submitted his application late and the organization has rules and regulations manager has to follow (Cremer, Zeelenberg & Murnighan, 2006).
as little as 3 hours
In conclusion, an integrative negotiation strategy is the best way to solve conflicts, since it prevents the reoccurrence of the same dispute.
Cremer, D. Zeelenberg, M. & Murnighan, K. (2006). Social psychology and economics. United State of America: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.