Homework Question

Define the contrast principle, its value in the negotiation setting, and how it can contribute to a win-win outcome.

The distinction between Alice's performance when she initially started work at Netflix and her performance now at Netflix would be the contrast principle in this negotiation. Both parties benefit from this difference in talks. It's a good method for Alice to remind people that her performance wasn't always bad. Sharon can use it to justify why she believes these legal actions are essential. This contrast can lead to a win-win situation if they utilize Alice's previous performances as evidence that she can be retrained and perform as well as she did previously.

Using the contrast principle, outline two potential negotiating tactics that you would recommend Sharon Slade use in the negotiation meeting with Alice Jones. The gambits should help reach an integrative (win-win) outcome. Include examples to illustrate each gambit.

Sharon might utilize information sharing as a tactic. She might start by stating why Alice is being considered for termination, and why they believed it was critical to replace her and/or any skills her replacement possesses. Full honesty can put Alice at ease throughout the discussions and make her not feel as if they're trying to keep things concealed from her.

Making the initial offer and then promptly commit to a Counter Offering is another way. If you make the first bid, she will start things in her favor. It helps her to obtain information and understanding about the issue, and it sets the stage for all counteroffers that will benefit her. Alice can indicate that she's ready to cooperate to build a win-win outcome with an instant counter-offer.

Explain the value of each gambit to the negotiation process.

In this procedure, each approach is quite beneficial. The primary advantage is that everyone helps Sharon and Alice in their conversations to achieve a win-win scenario. Sharon may make Alice feel less frightened and more likely to make productive counteroffers with these tactics.

Provide the reasons why each gambit could increase the likelihood of a successful negotiation session. Include your thoughts on the importance of striving for a winwin outcome in any negotiation setting.

Since each method stresses "all cards on the table," the odds of successful talks can be increased. Sharon comes with all the facts that might make Alice feel that the discussions are ineffective for her. Sharon, however, may feel more comfortable with these tactics, which will lead to stronger offers and an easier negotiation process. All parties involved can benefit from a win-win conclusion in a negotiation. It expresses the concept that the company is a fair worker that wants to change its policies to help its employees. Employees would feel better and say how pleased they were to be working with her.

Secondary Sources

One reference source that supports my decisions is the Michael’s Schaerer article. This article provides a conversational approach for negotiators. It implies that using an offer structure to direct receivers to their reservation price has both an assimilating (economic gain) and a contrasting effect (satisfaction with the negotiation) (Schaerer et al., 2020). In this scenario, Sharon will be able to explain why she believes Alice should be retrained or fired. This will give Alice greater confidence in explaining why she believes they should collaborate to achieve a win-win solution in which she is not fired.

The article by Chet Harding is another course that validates my strategies. This research explains the principles to improve negotiations. One of major principle is providing counter- offers to other parties and focusing on the power to agree or not when making negotiations (Harding, 2020). Martin’s study backs up my tactic of information sharing. He created a dyadic bargaining activity in which participants pick alternatives and speak with one another using a chat window interface thus share information (Martin-Raugh et al., 2020).

References