Study Guides (380,000)
CA (150,000)
UOttawa (10,000)
CMN (400)
Midterm

CMN 4131 Study Guide - Midterm Guide: Alternative Dispute Resolution, Decision-Making, Best Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement


Department
Communication
Course Code
CMN 4131
Professor
Sherry Ferguson
Study Guide
Midterm

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 12 pages of the document.
Negotiation and Mediation
ADR: alternative dispute resolution
Alternative dispute resolution: Part 1
Purpose, types, and characteristics of ADR
Purposes: To reduce the delays and high costs (financial and emotional) commonly
associated with adjudication.
By adjudication, we mean formal legal process conducted by a judge or jury in a court of
law. Decisions reached on point of law rather than moral right or wrong.
Common types of ADR
Negotiation
Mediation: Involves a third party and acts as a mediatory.
Arbitration
Conciliation
Facilitation
Hybrids
Rights-based vs. Interest-based ADR
Rights-based
o Concerned with legal rights disputant but not adjocating (e.g.. grievance,
Interest based
o Concerned with interests of disputants (e.g., mediation, conciliation,
facilitation)
Definitions
Negotiation: discussion between two parties with a view reaching agreement
without assistance from a third party. Effort of two or more parties to reach
agreement on some iddue. May be unassisted (parties may negotiate for themselves
or someone else may represent them as in union-management cases)
Mediation: Voluntary process for settling disputes in which acceptable, impartial
and neural third party, who has no authorities decision-making power. Helps
disputing parties reach mutually agreeable solution.
Arbitration: settling of a dispute by an impartial third party, often binding.
Conciliation: A neutral third party, with no decision-making power, acts as go-
between with disputing parties to arrive at resolution to dispute. Parties usually do
not meet together.
Facilitation: A process of helping or guiding group to have a conversation, come to
agreement, or plan for the future. Neutral outside voice. Makes process decisions
but allows group to control content of the discussion. A gentle guide, making it
easier for the group to have that discussion.
Hybrids
Bargaining: Generally used to hard style of negotiation, competitive and positional
(not principled or interest-based)
BATNA: Best alternative to a negotiated agreement. In other works, your toher
options if negotiations fails. Better your BTNA, more power to set bottom line and
minimum acceptable agreement. Walk away if you don’t get minimum.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Integrative or principled negotiation collaborative and interest-based negotiation,
often called win-win negotiations
Distributive negotiation competitive and positional negotiation, often taking the
form of hard bargaining of the union-management variety and referenced as win-
lose negotiations
Positions vs. interests: Position is your stated stance. What you will and will not do
or accept. Interests are underlying needs, concerns, and fears. Can sometimes be
met in ways other than demands that appear in position statements.
o Classic example of orange: Underlying interests vs. positions.
Myth of the fixed pie: Erroneous idea that size the pie is fixed, but you can expand
size of pie by expanding issues being discussed. Associated with idea of tradeoffs.
Ombudsperson: 3rd party who investigates and expedites complaints with the goal
of settling the complaint or proposing changes.
Framing: How you describe a problem (e.g., as a person or a behaviour; as a
situation of blame or opportunity to get at underlying issues in situation)
Assumptions underlying ADR
Conflict is inevitable
Unresolved conflict diminishes morale
Constructive dissent can be positive
Both rights-based and interest-based approaches have their place in the organization and
in society.
ADR is not appropriate for every conflict.
Characteristics of ADR
When used in appropriate situations:
o More flexible than adjudication
o More creative than adjudication
o Less adversarial than adjudication
o More under control of parties
Bases for popularity in Canada
Growing multiculturalism (e.g. racial and ethnic diversity in workplace and communities)
Popularity in other national and cultural contexts (aboriginal, African, etc.)
Women’s rights movement
Costs and backlogs in court adjudications
Acrimony in divorce and custody disputes, with neither side winning
Environmental struggles
What is Power?
Ability to influence an individual’s psychological field, including behaviour, opinions,
attitudes, values, needs and goals.
o Most widely accepted definition
o By John French &
Ability to bring about outcomes they desire
Resides in relationships
Who are the powerful?
What are the sources of power?
According to French and raven:
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

o Reward power
Ability to give or withhold benefits
Can increase or decrease
o Coercive power
Ability to make demands, issue threats, or punish anyone who doesn’t accept
ideas
Strength of power and effectiveness dependant on likelihood that party can
avoid or escape penalties or punishment
The more options available to the other person (e.g. the ability to leave the
marriage or organization), the less power the party using coercive
techniques
Decreased attractiveness of party that uses coercive power
o Legitimate power
Power that derives from formal position, accepted authority, or status in
network
Rightful power that is voluntarily granted in exchange for perceived
benefits
Usually limited in scope may be defined in job description or mandate of
organization
Questioned when abuse of power occurs
Decreased attractiveness in latter case
o Referent power
Refers to personal attractiveness of an individual
Usually implies similarity in beliefs, attitudes, and values
The greater the attraction to & identification with someone, the greater the
possibility for halo effect to occur, with transfer to broad range of areas
Interest in demonstrating personal connection to those with referent power
(e.g. through social media, LinkedIn, Facebook, instagram, twitter.)
o Expert or information power
Comes from access to knowledge or information we do not have
Implies ability to control access to or release of information
Limited to areas in which people have expertise
o Access to media (added by Ferguson)
Ability to gain air time to promote views (personal, political, economic, or
other)
Can be major source of power for an individual or group seeking support for
a cause such as a campaign or the environment or native rights
Some paradoxes pertaining to power: Bacharach & lawler
The more you give, the more power you have
o When you give more benefits, you become more atrractive
o When you become more attractive, you have more power to exercise influence
o Giving is more under your control than obstructing benefits from others
o Example: employer that provides higher than minimum wage and health benefits
advantage over employers that provide less
If you use power, you lose it
o Have coercive power to the extent that others depend on us
o If we take advantage of dependencies, over time our power declines
o Forcing compliance or withdrawing benefits achieves short-term goals at expense of
long-term relationships
An inferior position can provide a tactical advantage
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version