Internet Essays (2669 words) - Negotiation, Dispute Resolution

Internet 1.0 INTRODUCTION Negotiation is a common word that always appears in our personal and professional lives. Business is also negotiating. From the day you start thinking about having your own company, you are negotiating every step of the way. We negotiate when we buy office furniture, or when we do a project with co-worker, or when we are dealing with customers or even business partners. You will pay a price if you do not recognise the process for negotiation. Sometimes it is easy to negotiate, but other times, when we have a great deal at stake or we are upset, the task can be intimidating or difficult. In this paper, we are going to talk about what negotiation is, some stages, rules, strategies, etc. that can help you work and negotiate more effectively with your customer, co-workers, and boss. Also, they are also applicable to other interpersonal situations. (http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/cooperate/neg.htm) & (http://www.findarticles.com/cf_1/m1471/n3_v20/20350497/print.jhtml) 2.0 FINDINGS 2.1 What negotiation means Negotiation is the process through which two or more parties seek an acceptable rate of exchange for items they own or control. (Meredith & Mantel, 2000, p.229) Negotiation is a field of knowledge and endeavor that focuses on gaining the favor of people from whom we want things. (Meredith & Mantel, 2000, p.229) Negotiating is an inter-personal process. Each negotiating situation is different and influenced by each partys skills, attitudes and style. Understanding the negotiation process and the party involved with allow us to manage negotiation easier in satisfying both parties interest. Increase your salary; get you a better position; gather support for your project or department; gain approval for a budget; and improve your chance for success on the job are the reasons for negotiation. You will benefit through the process of negotiation if you success at the end. Therefore, it pays to overcome your aversion to haggling and your negotiating skills will be improved through the entire process. (http://www.findarticles.com/cf_1/m1471/n3_v20/20350497/print.jhtml) & (http://www.smartbiz.com/sbs/arts/bly60.htm) 2.2 Types of Negotiation Within Organization 2.2.1 Horizontal or In-Team Negotiations STAFF (PARTY A) STAFF (PARTY B) (http://www.lead.org/lead/training/international/usa/1999/docs/papers/effective_negotiation_techniques.htm) This type of negotiation refers to negotiations within group. Examples of this type of negotiation include assigning project responsibility, project meeting date and time, etc.) 2.2.2 Vertical Negotiations (http://www.lead.org/lead/training/international/usa/1999/docs/papers/effective_negotiation_techniques.htm) This type of negotiation refers to negotiations within organization. Normally this type of negotiations occurs between Manager to Staff, Management to Manager, Staff to Customers, etc. 2.2.3 External Negotiations (http://www.lead.org/lead/training/international/usa/1999/docs/papers/effective_negotiation_techniques.htm) This type of negotiation includes some external bodies such as Government, Trade Associations, etc. Company policy and Trade policy are examples of the issues to be negotiated. 2.2.4 Others Other types of negotiations include spokesperson negotiations, subcommittee negotiations, and multilateral negotiations, which are normally, occur in an informal private conference between staff. Member 1 in Party A have an informal conversation with Member 1 in Party B is an example of informal private conference. (http://www.lead.org/lead/training/international/usa/1999/docs/papers/effective_negotiation_techniques.htm) 2.3 Possible outcomes of Negotiation 2.3.1 Integrative (Win-Win) Integrative refers to a type of negotiation outcomes, which is a both sides WIN situation. Both parties cooperate in the negotiation process to maximize and distribute resources fairly to achieve mutual benefits. Integrative outcome is an ideal outcome that can maintain relationship with others for further development. (http://www.cba.neu.edu/~ewertheim/interper/negot3.htm) 2.3.2 Distributive (Win-Lose) Distributive refers to a type of negotiation outcomes, which are one side WIN and one side LOSE. The main reason of ending up a Win-Lose situation is one persons interests oppose the others and to maximise ones own interests. The dominant strategies in this mode include manipulation, forcing, and withholding information. (http://www.cba.neu.edu/~ewertheim/interper/negot3.htm) 2.4 Types of negotiators Negotiation is always affected by the personality of the negotiators. There are 2 main types of negotiator personality. They are: 2.4.1 Autocratic Negotiators Autocratic Negotiators clearly understand what they want and need in the negotiation process. But very often, you will find this type of negotiators fail to negotiate effectively because they do not have the ability to listen the need of the other party to figure the big picture of the negotiation issue. (http://www.onlinewbc.org/Docs/manage/negotiating.html) 2.4.2 Accommodating Negotiators Accommodating Negotiators are more concerned about what the other party want than their own needs. Accommodating Negotiators try to avoid argue and conflict arise in the negotiation process by giving certain amount of compromise, sometimes even override their own interest. (http://www.onlinewbc.org/Docs/manage/negotiating.html) 2.4.3 Good Negotiators The project manager must be a highly skilled negotiator in order to meet the high demands of a job of a project manager. A good/highly skilled negotiator

The War Against Drugs Essays - Drug Control Law, Drug Culture

The War Against Drugs Essays - Drug Control Law, Drug Culture The War Against Drugs Naufel Tajudeen Crimes, Drugs and Policy The War Against Drugs In this country, we are locked in war we simply cannot win. We strive to protect over 10,000 miles of border, against enemies who are driven by the lure of an obscene profit. We have fought this a version of this war before, and have lost. All that has really resulted from this war is the overcrowding of prisons, the expansion of law enforcement's ability to encroach on the personal lives of ordinary citizens, and paranoia and distrust. I am referring to the war on drugs. As time goes on, it becomes more and more evident that the war on drugs is as useless as prohibition was almost 80 years ago. Now it has become a point of pride for our elected officials, who use the war as a re-election tool. To most people the fiscal reasons for ending the war are the most convincing. For example, it costs over $30,000 per year to house a prisoner - this does not include processing and legal fees, only the actual prison costs - food, w ater, electricity and guards. There are over 1.5 million non-violent drug law offenders in prison right now, and this number is increasing daily. That means we are spending a minimum of $45 billion per year keeping former tax-paying citizens, most of whom had jobs and were contributing to the economy in some way, locked up with murderers and rapists. When these people get out of jail, they will have criminal records, which will make it nearly impossible to get a decent job and a grudge against the government and society in general. In addition, we spend $37 billion per year funding the police efforts and interdiction, and recent evidence suggests the CIA have been involved in drug-trafficking to fund its own private wars. Currently there is over $150 billion worth of drug traffic that remains untaxed. If one figures a tax rate of 15%, that is a total of $22.5 billion of taxes that America doesn't see. The bottom-line? The U.S. Treasury estimates America wastes a minimum of $104.5 bi llion per year fighting a war that can not be won, while crime rates continue to rise (because of the huge profits made possible by the risks involved in the drug trade as drugs remain illegal), and the quality of education, medical care and environmental protection falls due to lack of money in the budget. There are also moral dilemmas in declaring war on drugs and their users. Firstly, drug use or abuse is a medical and social problem not a criminal problem, yet we think we're solving the problem by throwing people in jail. The logic seems to be, maybe if we just take their life away, confiscate all of their personal property, ruin their reputation and self-respect, put them in jail with the worst elements of society - murderers, thieves and rapists, where they will most likely be beaten and/or raped repeatedly they will see the error of their ways. Not a very enlightened sentiment. Also bare in mind, nicotine, caffeine and alcohol are all drugs. Nicotine is one of the most addict ive drugs known to man, behind substances like heroin. Cigarettes kill over 300,000 people every year. Alcohol kills over 120,000 people every year. Alcohol has been linked to men beating their wives and children. In contrast, marijuana has a recorded history that dates back over 4000 years, and has never killed anyone in the direct way alcohol does. The DEA's own Administrative Law Judge, after reviewing the evidence, called marijuana ...one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man... It's been said that the first casualty in any war is truth. That sentiment is seen nowhere as clearly as in the war on drugs. The government and special interests have been running this war for over 50 years now. The government spews propaganda as truth, to cover their collective backsides, which creates distrust and unrest, and breeds contempt and disrespect in our children. An example - We have uniformed police officers coming into our classrooms telling kids that marijuana is mo re dangerous than alcohol. History and scientific evidence prove that it