The advantage of mediation is that the parties to the mediation reach their own agreement. The decisions of the parties are usually longer than the judge or jury in a dispute or the arbitrator in an arbitration. So far, we have talked about how to negotiate with a fairly reasonable opponent. However, you must be willing to negotiate with all kinds of adversaries, both reasonable and unreasonable. What if your opponent was more powerful and influential than you? What happens if they refuse to meet or talk to you? • Negotiation. When resolving conflicts, you can and should fall back on the same principles of collaborative negotiation that you use in negotiation. For example, you should aim to examine the interests underlying the parties` positions, e.B. the desire to resolve a dispute without attracting negative publicity or repairing a damaged business relationship. Also determine your best alternative to a negotiated agreement or BATNA – what you will do if you fail to reach an agreement, if you . B find a new partner or take legal action.
By thinking about options and looking for compromises between problems, you may be able to negotiate a satisfactory outcome to your dispute without the help of outside parties. Conflict resolution through negotiation can be good for everyone involved. Often, each party will get more from their participation in the negotiations than if they left, and this can be a way for your group to get resources that would otherwise be out of reach. After the meeting, you need to decide which solution is best. Review your brainstorming ideas. Score the best ideas – you`ll work with them during the conflict resolution process. Set yourself a time to discuss it and determine which idea is best. Compromises are described in the Mouton-Blake managerial grid as a win-lose deal where both parties get something they want, but not everything they want. Most disputes usually start with a competitive or cooperative strategy where the best possible outcome is the goal for both parties. However, a number of factors such as time requirements, financial costs, the use of power and influence, and practical issues often come into the equation. The realization that the initially desired goals may be unattainable pushes the parties to a process of give-and-take negotiation to reach a compromised mutual agreement.
The most important thing you can do as a leader in a conflict situation is to create a win-win environment by practicing your interpersonal skills, showing respect, trust, and courtesy to all parties, keeping egos at bay, seeking solutions that satisfy everyone`s interests, and identifying critical points of agreement and disagreement. During this time, you need to be ready and willing to deal with participants who continue to approach the situation from a win/lose perspective. They must be prepared to seek solutions that remove these parties from the negotiations. The goal is to use the skills and resources of both groups to achieve the best results for all. Which resolution gives the two groups the most? This resolution is probably the best. If you suspect that you are facing such a case, you may feel that you need to protect yourself. But this approach can cause you to act defensively, which only reinforces the win/lose dynamic you want to counter. If you are faced with such situations, try some of the following suggestions: • Selfish fairness interpretations. Instead of deciding what is right from a position of neutrality, we interpret what would be most fair to us and then justify that preference on the basis of fairness. For example, department heads are likely to think they deserve the lion`s share of the annual budget. Disagreements about what is right lead to confrontations. In conflict resolution, the best solution is the solution that best suits both parties.
Of course, this is not always possible to find, but you need to use all your resources to resolve your conflict as easily as possible. After all, compromise is perceived differently in different cultures. In the United States, compromise is sometimes considered bad because it is considered a loss or a return. This is exactly why some American critics think this is a bad approach. On the other hand, some traditional societies, such as traditional Hawaiian culture, view compromise as a healthy way to end conflict. In the Hawaiian tradition, compromise focuses on restoring relationships that have been damaged by conflict, which is generally considered more important than the amount of solid cake each party gets. The primacy of relationships over substance is common in many societies, which can lead to trade-offs when basic values or needs are not at stake. [1] Compromise is a fundamental negotiation process in which both parties give up something they want in order to get something else they want more. Compromises usually occur in win-lose situations – when there is a fixed cake that needs to be split, and whatever one side gets, the other side loses. In compromise situations, neither side gets everything they really want, but they each make concessions to reach an agreement acceptable to both.
If both parties have a preference for the Myers Briggs, the use of compromises may not be offered as an option by either party. You may be more inclined to invest in collaboration to meet the needs of both parties. Sometimes this is not possible, and a mediator may need to encourage the parties to consider a compromise as an alternative. If both people are “feelings”, it will be necessary to ask them to be objective and subjective in their assessment of the circumstances and possible outcomes. A compromise decision that meets functional and humanistic requirements is more likely to be accepted by both parties. As mentioned earlier, perhaps the most important skill you need to demonstrate in conflict situations is your ability to create a win-win environment. This requires the full participation of all parties in the negotiations, effective listening and a certain degree of compromise. They must lead the negotiations and promote the development of alternatives that can satisfy all parties concerned.
Effective leaders focus on goals and targets with the belief that optimal results can only be achieved when individuals and teams come together to pursue common goals. It may be necessary to “agree, disagree” on certain points when the dispute seems intractable and the reality that they will not be able to fully agree sets in. Consent to rejection is more often required when there are disagreements about values or principles rather than facts or methods. If both parties are able to really listen and try to respectfully understand the opposing party`s position, they can often come to accept their disagreements. Mutual acceptance of disputes increases the likelihood of a productive settlement of the dispute. When negotiating a compromise, it is important that there is a sense of reciprocity where each party renounces something of equal value or importance. A sense of fairness in concessions and concessions will keep the negotiation open and constructive. Practical and balanced offers that lead the dispute to a conclusion will increase the level of cooperation towards a compromise solution.
In practice, contestants usually cool their emotions by using litigation as a method of solving their problems. This changes once their emotions have calmed down, and they are now open to other methods of solution. So there is a method that I call Lit=Med. Litigation before Mediation. The parties then consider an agreement by mutual agreement. Their terms of settlement can be accepted as a court approval judgment. Time and cost issues allow them to investigate this process. In the case of Antonia and Juan, who bought their house, the compromise between them and Bob was limited to money and timing, both of which could be negotiated. While $5,000 is a considerable amount of money, these types of interests are relatively superficial and can be balanced through negotiation.
However, some things cannot be compromised because they go to the heart of an individual`s identity or the identity or survival of a group. Two things that are usually not compromised are basic human values and needs. The most desirable solution-oriented strategy for conflict management is cooperation. By creatively tackling the problem, a collaborative solution can be generated where everyone wins and everyone is better off…