Research Topics: NEGOTIATION PROCESSES

NEGOTIATION

What were you trying to achieve? What were the needs of the other side?       The critical, issue in organisational   behavior is safety in the work place. The management should provide their employees safety performance: safety compliance behaviors (e.g. following rules) and participation in activities that enhance the safety of the work environment (e.g. attending safety meetings). Because organizational behavior is affected by safety climate, or how much value employees perceive is placed on safety in the work place (e.g. as reflecting in management policies and leader behaviors). This work is significant as it challenges the existing emphasis on blaming individuals for accidents and instead recognizes the effect that the wider work context and management structure can have on employee safety.   The company is currently in need of an appropriate location for the office.   To be able to make the work place safe… the organization is in need of finances   Companies should have clear, strong, fair, and consistent written policies against violence and harassment, along with effective grievance procedures, efficient security programs, a reasonably supportive work environment, open channels of communication, and training  in resolving conflicts through team building and  negotiation skills. Plans should be in place that specify how threats are reported and to whom, as well as a protocol for investigating them. Negotiation Topic: Creating a safe workplace     The Negotiation Process/ Physical Environment   The management should provide good offices, clarify issues, find areas of agreement, or otherwise aid the parties in hammering out an agreement. Important as mediators are in helping parties resolve conflicts ranging from labor-management disputes over wages to international disputes over territorial boundaries. Timing The negotiation begins after the employees have identified the issues they want to raise during a meeting with the management. Attitudes and Behavior of each negotiator or team A study moved from emphasis of the individual to the social. Investigates communication processes in negotiations between two people (:1995). This research advances existing work on negotiation by taking into account the sequencing and timing of negotiation strategies. Effective negotiators are able to blend co-operative and competitive strategies, and use different strategies depending on the stage of negotiation and the motivations of the other negotiator. Negotiation outcomes are also affected by dyad composition. Negotiators who are more similar in cultural background and social motives are more likely to maximize joint gain than dissimilar negotiators. Research can be used for training negotiators to be more effective, such as by coaching them to strategically intervene at critical points in the negotiation or by establishing similarity at the outset of negotiations. Continuing the emphasis on social aspects, challenge the adage that `like attracts like’ in their work on the effect of demographic differences (e.g. age, gender, race and functional background) on employee attitudes and behavior. They show that the idea that they like, and are most influenced by, those who are similar to us does not fully explain the complex effects of demographic differences (:2001). For example, applying their ideas to temporary workers, the most negative effects of work status dissimilarity on employee attitudes and behavior occurred for permanent workers in temporary-worker dominated groups. Consistent with more sophisticated models of social interaction, such as social identity theory, it seems that working with lower status temporary workers erodes the prestige that permanent workers have, and this effect is worse for those in groups dominated by temporary workers. Research such as this assumes greater importance in the light of the increasingly diverse composition of many work places, and the growth in non-permanent forms of employment status. Perception of Power of bases of each negotiator and why either side respected the power bases, together with a brief outcome of the negotiation The measures of bargaining strength that were developed to assess the power of political parties in a parliamentary system using coalition voting. The measure of bargaining power that is not specific to any particular institutional arrangements but rather, in fact, quite general. After distinguishing it from another well-known measure of power. One cost is that bargaining power, as used here, may not translate into actual power in a specific conflict once players know and take account of each others’ preferences (2001). For example, an “opposition” coalition may form to counter the ostensibly most powerful actor-based on its prerogatives, as given by the formal rules-if this actor poses a threat to the interests of the coalition members. Such a coalition may not only stymie this actor but, more surprising, may be able to achieve this result without communication or coordination among its members. power than the others because its preferred outcome would prevail in the event of no settlement. According to the logic of the paradox, this fact put this player in a vulnerable position: if the other players acted strategically, it would suffer its worst outcome. Recognizing this problem, though, the powerful player apparently deceived the others into thinking its preference ranking was different from what it was by making a false announcement. Thereby the chair was able to escape the paradox and induce its next-best outcome by “tacit deception,” which did not reveal its misrepresentation. Still, bargaining power based on institutional arrangements-independent of the preferences of the members of the institutions-is important, even if there are ways of subverting institutions. The management agreed to provide a safe and healthy working environment for the safety of the employees. They will be drafting a plan and program for the said project.           Effective interpersonal and organizational communication as well as the group dynamics of the teams that make up the workforce of the company enables the firm to be one of the successful distributors and trading partners both in the international and in the local business community. In government, business, and other occupational arenas, professionals often need to communicate assertively and effectively outside the social boundaries of their own organization or organizational unit (such as outside their own department, division, or project group). Unfortunately, professionals might discover that engaging in cross-boundary communication can be a baffling and stressful experience that does not always result in a desirable outcome. Although many practitioners need to draw on an array of social and rhetorical strategies to succeed in cross-boundary communication and to avoid or overcome its associative risks, sacrifices, and problems, relatively little is known about how to interact and negotiate across organizational boundaries. What should both management and employees do to be able to reach out to one another?  Communication is the process on which the initiation and maintenance of an organizational change depends. Successful strategies are those that elicit cooperative interaction among people as individuals, work group members, and community stakeholders. Such strategies promote collaborative and united change efforts throughout all levels of the organization.(:1995) There should be weekly or monthly consultancy meeting between the management and the employees. Not that every single decision should be consulted to the employees but the suggestion is before making a big decision especially if the decision will have a radical change to the organization it must be consulted to the employees first.                                           References   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

NEGOTIATION

What were you trying to achieve? What were the needs of the other side? The critical, issue in ...

Effective Negotiations: Australia and Saudi Arabia

Effective Negotiations: Australia and Saudi Arabia Introduction             Difference between countries is a common issue, which can cause gaps between neighboring nations. This can also be the cause of some more serious issues like racial discrimination and violence. Considering that each nation has their own original roots, backgrounds, beliefs and practices, all countries then have features that are different and unique. With this fact, people should then consider learning how to appreciate each other’s differences. Rather than use them to set nations apart, each country must exert effort to link themselves to others. One of the purposes of good negotiation practices between nations is the growing globalization trend. It is then essential that countries are able to communicate successfully so as to gain the benefits of global trade.               Australia and Saudi Arabia are two distinct nations. With different cultural practices, beliefs and language, these countries are concrete examples of how two nations can be very different. Despite these differences, both countries can employ various means of communication or negotiation so as to build good relations. This paper will then concentrate on describing the differences of both nations in terms of their religion, political structure, language and culture. Ways on how to address these differences will also be discussed. In particular, means that would promote effective negotiations between Australia and Saudi Arabia will be the central focus of this paper. Differences of Australia and Saudi Arabia             Conflict may be defined as the perception of personal differences among individuals ( 2001). Other meanings of conflict defined the term as the process of social interaction between struggling parties over beliefs, status, power, resources and other desires or preferences. The goal of the contradicting parties may vary from a simple aim of gaining acceptance to securing a resource advantage; in worst cases, conflicting parties will go even to the point of harming or eliminating their opponents ( 2001).               Conflict can result due to a number of sources; in most literature, types of conflicts are often categorized based on the source or origin. Affective conflict for instance is a type of conflict that arises when two contradicting parties have incompatible emotions or feelings. This is why this type of conflict is also termed as relationship, emotional or psychological conflict. Affective conflict happens when interpersonal clashes are observed between the contradicting parties. Oftentimes, this type of conflict is characterized by frustration and anger. When two or more parties argue over content or task issues, substantive conflicts result. Also known as cognitive, task or issue conflict, this type of conflict occurs when speakers disagree on each other’s opinions or ideas in relation to the task at hand (2001).               Neighboring countries often encounter conflicts due to differing interests. In this type of conflict, two parties realize and understand the problem or issue; however, the solution they intend to use to solve it is different from one another.  Ideological conflict or the conflict of values is yet another source of conflict. Basically, this conflict type occurs when two or more social entities have contradicting ideologies over certain matters. Conflict may also occur due to contradicting goals. When social entities have different preferred results or decision outcomes, conflict may also result. A person or group may feel the need to cause conflict so as punish an opponent. This is referred to as retributive conflict. Lastly, conflict may also be considered as displace conflict; this happens when conflicting parties direct their emotional disturbances or negative feelings towards other who are not involved in the issue (2001).   These conflicts are likely to affect good relations and effective negotiation between Australia and Saudi Arabia considering their obvious differences. It is then imperative that both countries must focus on addressing their religious, language and cultural differences. In order to address these, certain actions must be done. Below are some of the factors that could affect the countries’ negotiation efforts as well as ways on these can be resolved.   Religion Australia is a country that has no state religion or a common established church. The Australian constitution fully implements the people’s freedom of worship. Majority of the population are Christians (68%), which is based on the census for 2001 ( 2006a). Among the Christian population, some consider themselves as Roman Catholics while others as Anglicans. Other Christian denominations also exist in the country (29%), which includes the Protestant church, the Baptist Union, the Uniting Church, the Church of Christ, The Greek Orthodox Church and the Lutheran Church of Australia. Non-Christian religions are also observed in the country but in smaller groups only ( 2006).   Saudi Arabia on the other hand follows a different belief. Unlike Australia, where people can follow any religion, Islam is the only religion officially recognized in Saudi Arabia; other religions are not tolerated publicly. Around 90% of the country’s total population is Muslim Arabs of the Wahhabi sect, a branch of Sunni Islam; the remaining percent on the other hand, is represented by the Shia Muslims and other religions ( 2004).   Religious beliefs play an important role in each country’s culture. Most importantly, it affects a person’s way of life; it also influences one’s thoughts, principles and outlook. Conflict on religious beliefs can then emphasize the negotiators differences, such as in the case of Saudi and Australia. It could affect how they view certain issues and the way they develop possible solutions. As religion could affect these negotiation factors, it is likely that negotiators from Australia and Saudi would stress on different points of view; this in turn makes it difficult to achieve a less complicated settlement.    Language             The official spoken language in Australia is English. However, in some parts of the country, especially in Aboriginal communities, native languages are still used. In addition, most of the first and second generation migrants of Australia are bilingual. Strine or Australian English is the English language form used in the country. The language originated from British origins; however, several factors led to the development of the language. One of these factors was the influx of the immigrants in Australia especially during the first gold rushes.   From then on, Australian English has been a flexible language that borrows words and sounds from external influences. For instance, strine has elements of the North American English; this is due to the increased presence of the American military personnel during the Second World War. The Americanization of the Australians’ English was also brought about by the massive importation of television programs with American content from 1950s up to the present (2006). According to linguists, Australian English can be categorized into three types, which include the broad, general and cultivated. These varieties mainly differ in terms of the accent used. In some cases, understanding these language types can be used to determine the educational background or the social class of the speaker.   The Broad Australian English for example, is the distinctive and most common type. This type of Australian English is recognized by English speakers as this is used by popular Australian characters in non-Australian movies and television shows. The stereotypical Australian English is also known as the general type. This is the Australian English that is used by most Australians; moreover, this language has the accent that is used in modern Australian entertainment. The cultivated version of the Australian English bears some similarities with the language used in Britain. This language however, is only spoken by a few Australians, which is less that ten percent of the population ( 2006).               In Saudi Arabia, Arabic is the official language and spoken by most of the locals. The Arabic language is closely related to the Aramaic and Hebrew languages. This is also the biggest member of the Semitic branch within the language family of the Afro-Asiatic. The Arabic language is widely spoken all over the Arab and Islamic world. Two main Arabic dialects are observed in the country, which include Baharna Arabic and Gulf Arabic. Baharna Arabic is an Arabic dialect used in the eastern provinces of the country, specifically Qatif and other neighboring villages. The Gulf Arabic on the other hand, integrates a number of Persian loan words.               In order to negotiate properly, negotiators must use the appropriate medium. Language stands for one’s cultural background, beliefs and values. In a dispute where differences are emphasized, it is essential that a common ground between conflicting parties is present. The use of a common language for negotiation then enables a more efficient interchange process. By means of language, the message that the negotiator would like to relay is easily received and understood by the receiving party. This then prevent further conflicts from arising. Comprehension of the issue is also ensured through the use of a common language in the negotiation process; as certain languages speaks of ones background, its use in the process can then allow both parties to realize why the issue arose and how this can be resolved.   Disagreements are often caused by personal differences; thus, using a factor that is common between conflicting parties like language can then make the negotiation process easier. In conclusion, language is significant in the process as this supports the achievement of the ultimate goal of negotiation, and that is to reach immediate settlement. Prolonging the dispute or argument is prevented through the use of appropriate languages. Between Saudi and Australia, problems in negotiation can arise due to their different official languages. Without a common medium, the negotiation process take a long time; moreover, it will be difficult for negotiators to understand one another and coordinate for settlement.   People and Culture             Majority of the Australians are of Irish and British decent; most of the people also live in the country’s urbanized regions. Over the years, the population of Australia has grown considerably due to the implementation of the immigration programs after the Second World War. These have also increase the level of cultural diversity in the country. The Australian culture itself is diverse due to the presence of the indigenous groups or the Australian Aborigines, who represent the first inhabitants of the continent. The Australian Aborigines are made up of the Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal people who take about 2.2% of the country’s total population ( 2006). This population percentage however, increased considerably during the 1990s. The Torres Strait Islanders are also known as the Melanesian people and the indigenous group found in the islands of the Torres Strait.   While initially, the indigenous population is typically found in the rural areas, more and more Aborigines are moving on to the urban cities. Although most of them are already in the urbanized areas, traditional ways of life among the Aborigines are still observed. So as to assert the role of the Aborigines in their new communities, each region is represented by an Aboriginal land council; in addition relevant festivals and cultural centers are conducted for the Aborigines (2004).   The people of Australia generally aspire or enjoy middle class lifestyles in the suburbs. In terms of homes, rented accommodations have been in demand due to the reduction of family sizes and the preference of the Australian on sophisticated modes of living. This has been supported further by the efforts of the government to optimize investment on various infrastructures such as water supplies, transportation and other facilities. Fashion in Australia is considerably patterned after Western styles. Most of the clothing designs are lightweight, colorful and casual, suggesting the absence of severe cold weather in the country (2006).   Majority of the people in Saudi Arabia are Arab or Saudi residents, most of them are descendants of the Bedouin tribes. However, similar to Australia, the influx of immigrants created a culturally diverse Saudi Arabia. Immigrants typically come to the country to work; most of them came from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and the Philippines. Other cultures came from other Arab countries like Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Bahrain, Yemen and Egypt. Family holds a strong point in the country’s identity, social status and economy; hence, household sizes tend to be large. Within this context, the division between the roles of men and women is stressed; this is mainly due to the conservative influence of the Islamic religion as well as the people’s local beliefs ( 2006). While the Saudis observed their cultural traditions, they also prohibit other forms of celebration or entertainment. For example, cinemas and public theaters are not allowed and are considered incompatible to the Islamic principles and the Wahabbi tradition.   From this brief comparison, it is clear that Australian and Saudi Arabian cultures are very much in contrast with each other. Specifically, while the people of Australia are diverse and value good living, the Saudis’ culture is again deeply dependent on the principles of Islam. Similar to other factors mentioned, culture and the people’s way of life speak of one’s standards, practices and values. Moreover, culture is something that has developed over passed generations, making an indestructible and distinct feature of a nation. In terms of negotiation, it will then be a challenge to insist on certain issues or resolutions that do not coincide with the other party’s culture or way of life. Again, conflicts of interest can prolong the dispute, directly affecting the process of international negotiation. Differences in culture also make the analysis of issues difficult considering that Australia and Saudi Arabia have different cultural priorities.   Government             The system of government in Australia is a federal parliamentary democracy. In 1901, the Australian constitution, which is patterned after the parliamentary traditions of both British and American system, had been effective. As a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, the country considers the British as its sovereign and head of state. The Australian prime minister on the other hand is in charge of the parliament. The commonwealth’s executive power is entrusted to the governor-general, who serves as the representative of the British sovereign, and a cabinet that is led by the prime minister. The cabinet on the other hand is the representative of the coalition or party in charge of the parliament’s lower house. Authorities that are not covered by the federal government are given to the states (2004).   The government system and practices in Saudi Arabia is very much different from The Australian system as it is centered on religion. Specifically, the Arabian government implements the Islamic law called Sharia for the people to follow. In Australia, religious beliefs are only concentrated on church and faith; however, in Saudi Arabia, Islamic practices also influence other factors including the government, taxation rules, business and law. Saudis as well as foreigners can act as they wish behind closed doors; but in public, they must comply with several strict religious requirements. Some of these laws include the requirement for men and women to dress conservatively, gender segregation as well as mandatory daily prayers among men. In order to ensure that these laws are strictly followed, the government has established an agency called the Committee to prevent vice and promote virtue whose official enforcers are known as mutawwa’in. These official enforcers have the authority to arrest any unrelated females and males who were caught socializing. The officers also have the power to ban consumer media and products like toys, gamed, television shows and Western music. The agency even launched a website where people can feed in information about people doing activities that are not patterned to Islamic principles. Violators of the law can go through harsh and severe punishments like public beating or whipping (2006).   The Saudi Arabian laws are based on Sharia. The Ministry of Justice is the one responsible for operating the Sharia courts with the minister of justice as the chief judge. The summary courts, general courts, the Court of Cassation and the Supreme Council of Justice serve as the country’s main tribunals. It is the duty of the Supreme Council of Justice to manage the activities of the lower courts, express legal views as well as review the legal questions provided by the minister of justice. Furthermore, this tribunal is in charge of reviewing sentences given for serious criminal cases. The punishments for serious crimes can be through amputation or death by means of stoning, hanging and beheading. On the other hand, the Court of Cassation is the one responsible for dealing with questions about penal and personal status suits ( 2006). In a negotiation, leaders of the country or head negotiators are the ones that participate in the negotiation process. Their beliefs, principles and communication approaches are naturally based on their respective governmental practices. If the Australian negotiators will base its negotiation statements on democracy while the Saudi negotiators depend on the Islamic beliefs, a significant contrast is very evident. It has been mentioned that contrasting beliefs and principles give rise to conflicts, making negotiations difficult or even impossible. Aside from beliefs, that actual laws being implemented in both countries are concrete sources for negotiation difficulties. Compared to the Australian Constitution, Saudi Arabia implements stricter control on people that is based on their religion. If both countries will negotiate about trade for instance, developing laws that would govern this process will be very difficult. In the same way, if both countries will deal about recruiting expatriate workers, labor laws will have to be developed; due to different legal practices and beliefs, negotiating about these laws can be complex.   Bridging the Gap: Negotiation Recommendations             Based from the given features of Australia and Saudi Arabia, major differences can be identified. For instance, in the religious aspect, Australia treats religion as a separate cultural element while Saudi Arabia uses Islamic practices to govern its political, social and economic systems. Having different religious views and principles can then be considered as a cause of gap between these countries. Moreover, the lack of knowledge regarding each other’s valued elements can make communication difficult. Another point of difference is the language used in both nations. While Australia has English as its official language, Saudi Arabians use Arabic dialects for communication. It is essential that a common medium is utilized by speakers from both nations to facilitate effective communication.               There is also an apparent difference between the cultural practices and beliefs of Australia and Saudi Arabia. While the Australian government supports the well-being of the citizens with less restraining laws and standard legislations, the Arabian administration has to ensure that the locals strictly comply with the principles of Islam. In addition, the Saudi Arabian government appears to prefer a different policy in punishing the violators of the Sharia law. The Australians way of life is also very different from the Saudis. In particular, the Australians value a recreational lifestyle.   The Saudis on the other hand, prefer to live a life committed to religion; in addition, their activities are quite limited due to the Islamic principles as compared to the Australian lifestyle. This difference suggests the opposite personalities of the Australians and Saudis. The differences in characteristics or personalities can cause conflicts as well. Naturally, these personalities influence ones views and principles; the absence of a common ground between these countries can again affect negotiation efficacy. Despite these, both Australia and Saudi Arabia can apply various means in order to negotiate effectively as well as overcome their differences.   1. Effective Negotiation Practices             In order to prevent conflict and ensure effective communication between two diverse nations, negotiation procedures or practices must be employed. According to  (2004), negotiation can be conducted through four main approaches, which include avoidance, accommodative, integrative and distributive approaches. The accommodating and avoidance approaches of negotiation can be of use for status quo maintenance. The distributive approach on the other hand tends to make the speakers stick to their own positions over the issue; with this approach the negotiators learn and achieve very little progress. On the contrary, integrative negotiation approach enables the speakers to collaborate and develop a shared problem definition. With this approach, transformation of practice as well as learning is promoted.               Seeing that the integrative approach is the most appropriate for addressing the differences between Australia and Saudi Arabia, focus will be given on this approach.  (2004) noted that essential tactics and strategies must be observed in employing the integrative negotiation approach. For instance, there should be a free flow of information among the speakers. Openness to the objectives and needs of each individual negotiator must also be observed. It is essential that the negotiators understand their differing agendas.   Rather than emphasize on what makes each negotiator different from another, similarities among the negotiators must be highlighted. It is also important that the process and the negotiation outcome do not favor any particular side; factors affecting the issue or problems must be understood from different angles. This will help ensure that the result of the negotiation process will benefit all participating parties ( 2004 ).              (2004) stated that certain targets must also be observed to support integrative negotiation success. Negotiators for example must develop a common goal or objective. As mentioned, differences tend to cause conflicts and make communication difficult. By means of having a common goal, negotiators will be able to have a clear direction and aim. Having a common objective can also help narrow down issues concerned and concentrate all the efforts of the negotiators towards the achievement of this common objective. It is also important that the negotiators trust their ability to solve the problem. Having faith in each other’s capabilities make the process easier and more efficient; issues can also be settled with clear and more effective solutions through positive-thinking. As this is a collaborative process, a driving force that will motivate the negotiators should also be present. This can come in the form of the benefits each will acquire upon the resolution of the issue. Through motivation, negotiators will become more committed to the process. Finally, it is important that the negotiators have access to accurate and clear information. This will support effective communication as well as comprehension ( 2004 ).   The negotiation concepts of were supported by  (2000); using a methodological framework,  explained that a total of seven steps must be done in order to facilitate integrative negotiations. This framework indicates the need to conduct an initial preparation where problems, relations, conflicts and practices are clarified. This step ensures that all negotiating participants understand the full scope of the issue and its affective factors. Moreover, this is a critical step in preventing the rise of conflicts during the negotiation process. Within this methodological framework, fact-finding, achieving agreement, monitoring and assessment procedures are also included.   Before these negotiation approaches had been introduced, methods of addressing differences and conflicts had already been developed. One of these conflict management styles is through compromise where one party would just have to agree to one side of the argument. Postponement or procrastination is another style of conflict management; in this method, action will be done in order to determine the cause of the conflict while the solution to the problem is delayed. Another traditional method of conflict management is avoidance. Here, both the cause and the solution to the conflict are simply avoided.   If these methods will be analyzed, none of these conflict management styles appear to be effective. For one thing, no positive resolution is obtained out of these styles, particularly in postponement and avoidance methodologies. Moreover, the focus is on short-term rather than long-term solutions. In compromise for example, one contradicting side will just have to give in to the argument so as to prevent the conflict from worsening. The postponement technique on the other hand, used the delay factor so as not to prolong the argument. Among other conflict management styles cited, the avoidance strategy is perhaps the most ineffective as there were no effort exerted to resolve the conflict. These conflict management styles are then inappropriate for bridging the gaps between Australia and Saudi Arabia.    (1999) indicated that negotiators must have the confrontation skill in order to handle issues and conflicts. This is because conflicts can be destructive if negotiators will just choose to avoid or ignore them. Others tend to adapt this negotiation style in order to avoid hurting others’ feeling or acting impolite. By means of confrontation, conflicting parties are able to face, analyze and settle the issue; they are allowed to generate views and ideas, which can help achieve clear settlement. Aside from these, confronting rather than avoiding the problem generates the feeling that both sides are willing to resolve the matter by hearing each other out. Face to face interaction also exhibits respect, openness and commitment.    (2003) suggested that conflicts should be managed through the same strategies applied for negotiations. These include lose/lose, win/lose and win/win techniques. In the lose/lose conflict management strategy, neither contradicting party wins the argument. Although either party may have benefited from this strategy as the disagreement is immediately addressed, this style may still not be recommendable since no solution is reached. In the win/lose style, the losing party will likely be hostile to the winning party; this negative feelings in turn prevents the losing party from being cooperative and committed to the given solution. In a sense, there is no actual winner in this conflict management style since cooperation and friendship is not achieved.                The win/win strategy is the most effective conflict management style among the three mentioned negotiation strategies. This is mainly because this strategy leads to the most favorable outcome. The win/win strategy actually has some similarities with  integrative negotiation. With this strategy, a solution is developed and all parties involved are satisfied with these solutions (2003). Though the parties may not obtain what they initially intend to achieve, both sides receive at least part of their objectives. As both conflicting parties gained something beneficial out of the disagreement, friendship is established. Furthermore, both are likely to participate in implementing the solution they agreed upon. Although this strategy results to the best outcome, it is the most difficult to apply. Compared to the two other cited styles, the win/win strategy takes the most time, energy and effort. Since both parties would have to benefit in the situation, all possible alternatives would have to be considered.               In the negotiation process, the approach or style to use is not the only key in addressing differences among foreign nations. It is also important that the negotiators themselves are equipped with the right skills and attitude to support effective interaction. For instance, it is essential that the negotiators from Australia and Saudi Arabia have the right communication and listening skills for conflict management. It is important that the representatives must be able to speak up his or her thoughts to others. Without proper communication abilities, negotiators will just feel frustrated and uncommitted every time a conflict arises. Effective communication also observes two-sided conversation; in this aspect, negotiators encourage conflicting parties to raise their views and reasons in line with issue involved. Negotiators should not refrain from hearing the parties’ inputs and just focus on developing the right solutions.   Listening abilities is also important among negotiators; in this case, the representatives should concentrate on what both sides are saying and not on response for each point raised. The aim of having these important skills among negotiators is to ensure that a positive environment is observed despite the conflict ( 2005). The maintenance of a positive environment is not only helpful for developing the right solutions but also in speeding the process of conflict management.               Conflict management also requires the right attitude among negotiators. For example, they must be able to handle their emotions well. Strong negative emotions such as despair, frustration and anger must be managed well so as not to worsen the situation. Through effective emotional management, respect will be exercised among all parties involved. It is essential that speakers do not verbally attack others who are trying to raise certain issues; it is important that negotiators still see to it that good relations are still observed. Rational behavior is also important in conflict management; negotiators should realize that they have to be connected with the parties at all times so as to understand the situation and implement the proper solutions.   By means of these procedures and recommendations, negotiators from Australia and Saudi Arabia will be able to conduct effective interactions; less conflict will also arise between them despite their obvious differences. With these given negotiation approaches, both countries will be able to set their cultural differences aside and realize each other’s commonalities. Following the integrative and win/win negotiation approach can then help both countries address their different religious, political, social and cultural background.   2. Application of Public Relation Principles             Although public relation is more applicable in the international business field, its principles can also be applied in the negotiation process especially in helping countries overcome each other’s differences. Public relations, in general, have three main functions in business ( 1992). One of which is to represent the company within its home market, which would involve dealings with local constituents and the government in line with the relevant issues to its international enterprise. Secondly, public relations serve as a communication channel between the company top management and the foreign management; this function aims to remove the communication gap between both parties. Finally, public relations are utilized to conduct PR activities within the host countries. These functions had then been used by companies not only to promote their products to the public but also to ensure that continuous consumer support will be obtained.   Culture is one of the significant aspects of public relation. According to  (1999), culture can be described as patterns of language, values and behavior which determine the relations within a community. It then pertains to a system of learned behavioral patterns that characterized the members of a particular society and not brought about by biological inheritance. Culture is considered an important element of international public relations as the identification of the distinct cultural features of a country allows PR practitioners to develop the right message, use the appropriate communication channel and select the most effective spokesperson to deliver the organization’s message.   This is clearly related to effective negotiation as the process also requires the proper selection of communication means. Moreover, the description of this PR principle clearly emphasizes that in order to reach out to a country with a different cultural background, negotiators must be knowledgeable about various cultures. Understanding the cultural background of the intended foreign market is important so as to ensure that the right message is delivered. Insufficient comprehension of this PR element often leads to embarrassing communication mistakes. In terms of negotiation, knowing the culture of others can then lessen conflicts and reduce cultural gaps between nations. Australian and Saudi negotiators can then ensure successful negotiation by studying and understanding each other’s culture as well as differences.   In the marketing arena, this negotiation factor is commonly known as local responsiveness. The theory of local responsiveness and global integration suggests that the differences of countries in various aspects should be taken seriously. Negotiators should not underestimate the value of local knowledge in international negotiations as this will help them fulfill their international objectives. Negotiators should then tailor their approaches in accordance to the needs of other negotiating parties. Various cultural aspects like religion, education and values should then be considered by negotiators so as to develop immediate settlements and establish good international relations.   3. Language and Education             Although negotiation approaches can effectively address the differences of foreign nations, it is essential that a common mean of communication or medium is used among their negotiators. The consideration of this factor will then address the language barrier between Australia and Saudi Arabia. In the case of both countries, language gap is not really a major issue as English can be used as the communication medium. However, it is important for Australian negotiators to familiarize themselves with the Arabic language. The importance of doing this has been discussed in one online article by  (2000) where the author focused the discussion within the Chinese business setting.  stated that in order for foreign business entrepreneurs to successfully penetrate the Chinese market, operators must familiarize themselves with the country’s official language. If this will be difficult for the operator, a person who can speak the language would have to be hired. This is not only for the purpose of making communication easier, but this is also an important sign of respect for the Chinese community (2000).   Exerting effort to learn the language is highly recognized by the Chinese entrepreneurs; in addition to the establishment of respect, this could also be a significant tool for building good business relations in China. As the country has a number of different dialects, it is important for the operators to identify the exact Chinese area where the business will be located. Learning to speak Mandarin may be the most practical step as it is the most widely used language in the country (2000). Relating it to the case of the Australian negotiators, being familiar with the Arabic language may not facilitate actual communication but could promote good relations.   In addition to this step, both countries as well as nations in general should consider the integration of foreign language education in schools. Both countries should also enforce bilingual education. This recommendation is applicable especially in Saudi Arabia as this will help students to become fluent and confident English speakers. Bilingual education also has other advantages which could help in addressing differences between nations.   The goals of bilingual education include the development of the individual’s language and communication skills as well as his or her academic performance. Bilingual education aims to help learners develop high proficiency standards in their native and second languages. Further, this education also intends to enhance the student’s academic areas in both languages. The development of values such as the demonstration of positive cross-cultural attitudes and behaviors as well as confidence in communicating other languages, are also part of the goals of bilingual education.   Through successful bilingual programs, the students’ literacy and language proficiency are developed. In turn, this leads the children to successful academic fulfillment and socio-cultural integration. These two factors serve as measurement indicators for bilingual education effectiveness. The degree of development will depend primarily on the program goals. In most instances, the academic achievement of bilingual children is measured through their performance in standardized tests or through their performance of real life activities (2004).   The ability to function in the society and in the heritage community pertains to socio-cultural integration. However, bilingual programs rarely measure this outcome and at times, it is not considered as a measurement of success. So as to measure success, accuracy and fairness in the assessment procedure are essential. The successful performance of the students can be measured directly through the assessment of their literacy, language and content knowledge. The success of the students in language learning is also dependent on the program’s quality, resources, curriculum, assessment practices and personnel (2004).   In some other countries, learning other languages has become a popular trend. Within non-English speaking countries like Taiwan, students are very interested in learning multiple languages. For the past years, learning English has been a common activity in Taiwan. Adults and even young children follow this social trend. In turn, both preschool and kindergarten teachers are expected to give English-related activities to help the children learn the language. Preparatory programs for English teachers have grown and developed as well; relevant training for pre-service and in-service teaching has been incorporated in such programs. With this kind of training, workshops that share English teaching courses or strategies for improving the pre-service and in-service teachers’ English language skills are included (2005).   The people in Taiwan have realized the growing importance of learning other languages like English in order to adapt to business and employment demands. In addition, Taiwan is determined to stay ahead of its Asian neighbors and that being proficient with the English language will greatly contribute to the achievement of this goal. The country’s local administration has in fact realized the role of the English language, especially in strengthening Taiwan’s political and economic position. This interest in learning various languages, especially English, should be enforced in Saudi Arabia and in other non-speaking nations. Not only will this enhance the competence of non-English speakers to present work industry, but this can also facilitate effective negotiations. Being able to speak a common language can prevent miscommunication. This can also enable easier message dissemination. In times of conflicts, matters can easily be settled through common language.   The knowledge about culture and language has long been considered an essential element of successful international negotiations. This has been exemplified by several cases. For instance, in the business sector, the negotiation between a North American-based engine company and a Chinese import corporation has been successful through the cultural sensitivity of the American negotiating team. Specifically, the negotiators aimed to have the ability to close intercultural gaps as well as reach across cultural lines. In order to facilitate the negotiation process, the team ensured that at least one member can understand and speak the Chinese language. Furthermore, some of the members must deeply understand Chinese principles and way of thinking. By means of these important negotiation abilities, misunderstanding due to poor translation, word choice, habits, or mannerisms were easily resolved (1998). Through this example, it becomes clear that in order to carry out successful international negotiations, knowledge about the other side’s culture is important; this helps the negotiator to plan and communicate effectively during the process. Moreover, having the background about the country’s language can help in making the negotiation process easier; this helps the team to understand the messages relayed accurately. The preparation of the negotiators should involve extensive readings about the country’s customs and history; it will perhaps be helpful also if the negotiating team consults people who had experiences in dealing with the locals of the country in question. Negotiation can easily fail if the country’s cultural component is not fully understood by the negotiators. It is then best to prepare prior to entering any negotiations so as to prevent conflicts with other nations.               In the case of Australia and Saudi Arabia, both countries can negotiate effectively by optimizing their language capabilities. In particular, while there is a language gap between Saudi Arabia and Australia, English is considered an important second language of the Saudis. This language is typically used among non-Arab expatriate communities, in commerce, media and the government. Moreover, some Arabic words use English terms; most of which were derived from European languages. For example, sugar in Arabic is sukkar, magazine is maḫāzin and cotton is quṭūn ( 2006). With this background, language does not seem to be a major issue between Australia and Saudi Arabia. Moreover, as English is commonly used in important and formal events, Arabian negotiators will then find it easy to relay important information or messages. This common language can then be used to facilitate communication and negotiation between both countries.   Conclusion             Australia and Saudi Arabia are two very different nations. While majority of the Australians are Christians, Saudi’s greater population are followers of the Islamic religion. In terms of politics, the Australian constitution is patterned after American and British systems whereas the Saudi Arabian government strictly enforces the Sharia law that is based on the principles of Islam. The official languages of both countries are also different; the Australians speak the English language while the Saudis speak various dialects of the Arabic language. The cultural background of both countries perhaps is the factor that is very different from each other. In Australia for instance, people live a free lifestyle and enjoy outdoor activities. The Saudis on the other hand, live a very conservative and religious lifestyle. In addition, their activities are regulated by Islamic practices. From these features, it is clear that both countries have distinct practices, traditions and background.               These differences however, should not be a hindrance to both countries. It is true that conflicts arise due to differences; nonetheless there are certain ways on how differences can be addressed. In this paper, it has been suggested that both countries should consider the employment of effective negotiation approaches as well as language education. Various authors have cited different styles or approaches of negotiation and conflict management. There are styles where no settlement is achieved while another only favors one side of the issue. Based on its characteristics and outcomes, the integrative or win/win negotiation strategy is the most appropriate to bridge the address the religious and cultural differences between Australia and Saudi Arabia. With the negotiation process, both countries will be able to develop a common goal and optimize their similarities. Good relations, learning and communication will also be observed through this approach.               In addition, negotiators must also be equipped with the necessary skills and attitudes that promote effective negotiation. Specifically, negotiators must be open to the different objectives of the speakers and respect their personal views. The issue should also be analyzed through different angles; negotiators must also ensure that participating members will all benefit from the outcome of the process. Finally, a common language or mean of communication must also be established between negotiating countries. This will prevent miscommunication and ensure effective relations. Preparing students through bilingual education can also teach students to become appreciative rather than discriminative towards different cultures. In conclusion, the key to harmonious relations between different countries is not really on what negotiation process is appropriate; countries in general should rather focus on eliminating discriminatory practices and studying cultures that are different from their own. All nations must that traditions should be recognized and respected; this principle should then apply to their differences as well.   Conclusion             Australia and Saudi Arabia are two very different nations. While majority of the Australians are Christians, Saudi’s greater population are followers of the Islamic religion. In terms of politics, the Australian constitution is patterned after American and British systems whereas the Saudi Arabian government strictly enforces the Sharia law that is based on the principles of Islam. The official languages of both countries are also different; the Australians speak the English language while the Saudis speak various dialects of the Arabic language. The cultural background of both countries perhaps is the factor that is very different from each other. In Australia for instance, people live a free lifestyle and enjoy outdoor activities. The Saudis on the other hand, live a very conservative and religious lifestyle. In addition, their activities are regulated by Islamic practices. From these features, it is clear that both countries have distinct practices, traditions and background.               These differences however, should not be a hindrance to both countries. It is true that conflicts arise due to differences; nonetheless there are certain ways on how differences can be addressed. In this paper, it has been suggested that both countries should consider the employment of effective negotiation approaches as well as language education. Various authors have cited different styles or approaches of negotiation and conflict management. There are styles where no settlement is achieved while another only favors one side of the issue. Based on its characteristics and outcomes, the integrative or win/win negotiation strategy is the most appropriate to bridge the address the religious and cultural differences between Australia and Saudi Arabia. With the negotiation process, both countries will be able to develop a common goal and optimize their similarities. Good relations, learning and communication will also be observed through this approach.               In addition, negotiators must also be equipped with the necessary skills and attitudes that promote effective negotiation. Specifically, negotiators must be open to the different objectives of the speakers and respect their personal views. The issue should also be analyzed through different angles; negotiators must also ensure that participating members will all benefit from the outcome of the process. Finally, a common language or mean of communication must also be established between negotiating countries. This will prevent miscommunication and ensure effective relations. Preparing students through bilingual education can also teach students to become appreciative rather than discriminative towards different cultures. In conclusion, the key to harmonious relations between different countries is not really on what negotiation process is appropriate; countries in general should rather focus on eliminating discriminatory practices and studying cultures that are different from their own. All nations must that traditions should be recognized and respected; this principle should then apply to their differences as well.   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Effective Negotiations: Australia and Saudi Arabia

Effective Negotiations: Australia and Saudi Arabia Introduction Difference between countries is a common issue, which can c...

The impact of negotiation on purchasing essay

The impact of negotiation on purchasing   Negotiation has moved from the industrial relations arena to the forefront of managerial interest. As the nature and structure of managerial challenges evolve, negotiation skills become necessary. Considerable research has been conducted to determine how negotiators either fail to reach agreements that are in their best interest or leave them worse off. The focus of this article is to consider how managers could negotiate more rationally that is reach agreements that maximize the negotiator’s interests. Unfortunately, natural tendencies in negotiation and decision making contain biases that systematically reduce our ability to reach agreements that maximize our interests. While there has been significant research directed toward identifying these cognitive biases and their impact on negotiator behavior, there explore negotiator’s predilection for framing proposals in ways that reduce information search and analysis and direct the choice of alternatives. Thus, suggest that the frame such manager imposes on problems or disputes are function of the referent point by which we evaluate success or failure and gains or losses. In the context of negotiation, there is often little objective about the choice of particular referent point, although the point that we choose can significantly influence the attractiveness of various outcomes. The need to describe the impact of various frames and identify ways in which managers can guard against being unduly influenced by the frames of disputes as well as ways managers can use frames to improve the potential for resolving disputes.   The study of negotiations is giving increasing attention to relationships between the negotiating parties. This study describes the development of multidimensional index to measure the strength of the various facets of relationships. Results that used this instrument show that cohesive relationships encourage information sharing and discourage use of coercive tactics, both of which have direct or indirect effects on the attainment of integrative outcomes, negative affect, and the negotiators’ ongoing relationship. The selection and negotiation of purchasing bids is complex decision making process that requires consideration of variety of vendor attributes such as price, delivery performance, and quality. Although several decision models have been utilized for vendor evaluation and selection, this paper propose buyer–seller model that has distinct advantages over existing methods for bid selection and negotiation. The model effectively evaluates alternative bids based on the ideal targets set by the buyer. The alternative bid ratings are then utilized in an integer programming model in selecting an optimal set of bids that satisfy the buyer’s demand requirements. The model assists in proposing effective negotiation strategies for unselected bids in order to make them competitive. Finally, propose variations of model for evaluating different bid scenarios thereby providing flexibility for the buyer in selecting the appropriate method and report findings from field study of purchasing agents negotiating rebuy purchases of component parts.   The negotiating stance adopted by industrial buyers is characterized by their reliance on three basic negotiation strategies: problem solving, manipulating perceptions about competition and tough tactics. A structural model relating the purchasing agent’s use of each of strategies to six characteristics of the purchase context, the material cost sensitivity of the buying firm, supplier competition, uniqueness of the buying firm’s specifications, buyer’s cooperative orientation, having information, and formal planning is developed and empirically tested with data collected in national survey of more than 100 purchasing agents. There demonstrate the ability of the contextual variables to predict the emphasis purchasing agents will place on each of the individual strategies in any particular set of negotiations.   Indeed, successful path to purchasing negotiation often hinges on a buyer’s ability to gain relative bargaining strength. Unfortunately, the establishment of a strong bargaining position for a buyer is not a simple matter because of the multitude of factors affecting the buyer’s negotiation leverage. To help purchasing professionals develop more effective negotiation strategies, this study empirically identifies key factors affecting the bargaining position of purchasing professionals and their subsequent impact on negotiation outcomes. Thus, vendor selection and negotiation models have been developed to deal with multiple attributes including price, quality and delivery performance.   The computer has become useful tool for purchasing managers in administering contracts and in daily operations. Additionally, computer support for contract negotiations may also be provided. Research will investigate the use of computerized Negotiation Support System as an aid to purchasing manager, and to the sales manager with whom he or she is dealing, in an industrial buying/selling negotiation. After reviewing the results of three prior studies using student subjects, there reports on research study using purchasing managers as subjects designed to test the effectiveness of negotiation and to be able to conclude with suggestions about which organizations should develop an negotiating power upon purchasing process and how they should begin the purchasing based development effort.       Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

The impact of negotiation on purchasing essay

The impact of negotiation on purchasing Negotiation has moved from the industrial relations arena to the forefront of managerial inte...

Conflict Management in the Workplace

Common conflict styles   Current empirical data show that conflict styles are influenced by individualism-collectivism. People from individualistic cultures tend to favor styles of conflict resolution that are high in concern for the self, while collectivists are more likely to prefer styles that are high in concern for n-group members. When the others are members of an out-group, however, people from collectivistic cultures may be as concerned with their own outcomes as are people from individualistic cultures (Matsumoto 2001). Conflict styles range on a continuum from maximally direct to maximally indirect with several in-between styles that are only partially explicit. Further, there does not appear to be an absolute relationship between the directness of the style and the effects it has on interpersonal conflicts. Studies have observed that some harmonious couples communicate about conflicts very directly, whereas other harmonious couples avoid conflicts. Affect is a second important dimension of conflict styles. Some styles are hostile, others are neutral or friendly, and still other styles, such as conflict avoidance, are inconsistent or unclear in the sort of emotion expressed. The implications of affect are reasonably straightforward (Daly & Wiemann 1994).   Generally, people who are more compatible are friendlier to one another. For example, they make fewer confrontational statements, speak in a more positive vocal tone, sit closer together, touch one another more, and so forth. The main point of doubt about affect is whether negative communication is more a symptom or cause of incompatibility in relationships. Conflict styles tend to be reciprocal.  Generally, inconsistent styles do not fit together comfortably (Daly & Wiemann 1994).  It is more difficult and less plausible to deny the presence of conflict, for example, after the partner has disclosed deep-seated feelings of anxiety and resentment. There are also straightforward affective linkages between some styles (Daly & Wiemann 1994). There are various theories and studies that relate to conflict styles. Five of which were identified by Thomas and Killman. One conflict style aims to accommodate. This style pertains to the act where someone will just ignore the conflict so that the relationship will be maintained and acceptance can be given.  The accommodation style wants to focus more on the working relationship than achieving the goals.  The second conflict style aims to avoid. In this style one just wants to do anything he/she can to avoid in engaging in conflicts or engage in a confrontation. The avoid style doesn’t want to have unpleasant feelings.  The third conflict style aims to collaborate. In this style the goal is to search for a clear and logical solution that will satisfy all parties. The collaboration style wants to balance the achievements of goals and the maintenance of relationships.  The fourth conflict style aims to compete. In this style the goal is force one’s ideas because he/she believes that his/her idea is the best one. The conflict style just wants to achieve goals and satisfy individual needs.  The last conflict style aims to compromise. In this style the goal is for both parties to make compromise that will ensure that equal ideas will be followed.  The compromise style wants to meet halfway so that lengthy discussions will be avoided.     Handling Conflict Properly Studies on the management of organizational conflict have taken two directions. Some researchers have attempted to measure the amount of conflict at various organizational levels and to explore the sources of such conflict. Implicit in these studies is that a moderate amount of conflict may be maintained for increasing organizational effectiveness by altering the sources of conflict. Others have attempted to relate the various styles of handling interpersonal conflict of the organizational participants and their effects on quality of problem solution or attainment of social system objectives (Rahim 2001).  An organizational consultant may decide to use both process and structural intervention approaches for managing conflict. It should be noted that although process intervention is primarily designed to alter the styles of handling conflict of the organizational members through education and training, such an intervention may also affect their perception of the amount of conflict. On the other hand, the structural intervention is primarily designed to alter the amount of conflict by changing certain structural design characteristics; such an intervention may also affect the styles of handling conflict (Rahim 2001).   Interpersonal skill is one of a number of broadly similar terms that are sometimes used interchangeably. Other such terms include interactive skills, people skills, face-to-face skills, social skills and social competence. The study of interpersonal skills and interpersonal relationships is multidisciplinary and, at one level, each discipline has tended to focus attention on different contexts and different kinds of relationship (Hayes 2002). For one to negotiate well he/she must have interpersonal skills that can match qualities of various people. In negotiations, there is evidence that negotiators’ opening bids have an important influence on the expectations of opponents and that this can affect the outcome. There is also evidence that, in competitive negotiations, concessions are more likely to be reciprocated when the person offering the concession is perceived by opponents to be in a relatively strong position. It is possible for a negotiator to create this impression by behaving in certain ways Sometimes negotiations are one-off episodes and whatever happens between the parties is unlikely to have any long-term consequences. Often, however, they are embedded in ongoing relationships.  It may be possible to compete and push the other party into making heavy concessions today, but this may motivate them to seek ways of evening the score sometime in the future. Accommodating some of their demands, on the other hand, may create a sense of indebtedness that could have a beneficial affect on their approach to subsequent negotiations (Hayes 2002).  Negotiation strategies are needed to manage the conflict. Negotiation strategies can either be in the form of interest based or personal. The two strategies focus differently. The interest based strategies would require individuals to be cooperative so that the group’s goal can be achieved. The personal negotiation strategies maintain the individual goal and may lead to newer conflicts. To prepare to negotiate both parties need to identify what they want and how they want the negotiation process to run. In conducting negotiation both parties need to allow the other to express their opinion or ideas.   Conclusion Often a group finds itself in conflict over facts, goals, methods or values. It is critical that it properly identify the type of conflict it is experiencing if it hopes to manage the conflict through to resolution. The more difficult type of conflict is when values are the root cause. It is more likely that a conflict over facts, or assumptions, will be resolved than one over values. There are various theories and studies that relate to conflict styles. One conflict style aims to accommodate. This style pertains to the act where someone will just ignore the conflict so that the relationship will be maintained and acceptance can be given. It tries to solve conflict by pretending that it did not happen.  The second conflict style aims to avoid. In this style one just wants to do anything he/she can so that they will not have any encounter with someone he/she is in conflict with. The third conflict style aims to collaborate. In this style the goal is to solve conflict through meeting with all parties involved and brainstorming on what should be done to solve the conflict. The fourth conflict style aims to compete. In this style the goal is force one’s ideas because he/she believes that his/her idea is the best one.  The last conflict style aims to compromise. In this style the goal is for both parties to make compromise that will ensure that equal ideas will be followed. Negotiation strategies are needed to manage the conflict. To prepare to negotiate both parties need to identify what they want and how they want the negotiation process to run. In conducting negotiation both parties need to allow the other to express their opinion or ideas.   References Daly, JA & Wiemann, JM (eds.) 1994, Strategic interpersonal communication, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.   Hayes, J 2002, Interpersonal skills at work, Routledge, New York.   Matsumoto, D (ed.) 2001, The handbook of culture & psychology, Oxford University Press, New York.   Rahim, MA 2001, Managing conflict in organizations, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.         Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Conflict Management in the Workplace

Common conflict styles Current empirical data show that conflict styles are influenced by individualism-collectivism. People from indiv...