Monday, October 19, 2009

STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION



INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION

When a negotiation is integrative, it means that negotiation is based on interest or otherwise negotiation strategy which lay emphasis on win-win situation. The goal of Integrative Negotiation is to make the parties’ interest compatible, so that both sides can win. That is, reach an agreement that satisfies their need. The goals of the parties are integrative. Negotiations are not mutually exclusive. If one party achieves its goals, the other is not precluded from achieving its goals as well. The fundamental structure of integrative negotiation situation is such that, it allows both sides to achieve their objective. 1

While Integrative Negotiation Strategies are preferable, they are not always possible. Sometimes parties’ interests really are opposed as when both sides want a larger share of fixed resources.

CHARACTERISTIC OF INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION
Ø It focus on commonalties rather than differences
Ø It attempt to address needs and interests, not positions
Ø It commit to meeting the needs of all involved parties
Ø Exchange information and ideas
Ø Invent options for mutual gain
Ø Use objective criteria for standard of performance.

Past experience, based perceptions and truly distributive aspects of bargaining makes it remarkable that integrative agreements occur at all. But they do, largely because negotiators work hard to overcome inhibiting factors and search assertively for common ground. Those wishing to achieve integrative results find that they must manage both the contest and the process of negotiation in order to gain the cooperation and commitment of all parties. Key contextual factors include:

- Creating a free flow of information
- Attempting to understand the other negotiator’s real need and objective
- Emphasizing the commonalties between the parties and minimizing the differences
- Searching for solutions that meet the needs and objectives of both sides.

KEY STEPS IN INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION PROCESSS

There are four major steps in the Integrative Negotiation Process:
Ø Identify and define the problem
Ø Understand the problem and bring interests and needs to the surface
Ø Generate alternative solution to the problems
Ø Evaluate those alternatives and select among them.

Increasing Value to Buyer


Claiming Value





Creating Value Pareto efficient frontier

Increasing Value to Seller
The first three steps of the Integrative Negotiation process are important for “Creating Value”. While the fourth step o the Integrative Negotiation Process, the evaluation and selection of alternatives INVOLVE “CLOUMING Value”. Claiming value involves many of the distributive bargaining skills discussed earlier.

1. IDENTIFY AND DEFINE THE PROBLEM

The problem identification step is often the most difficult one and it is even more challenging when several parties are involved. Negotiator need to consider five aspects when identifying and defining the problems.

§ Define the problem in a way that is mutually acceptable to both sides.
§ State the problem with an eye toward practicality and comprehensiveness
§ State the problem as a goal and identify the obstacles to attaining this goal.
§ Depersonalize the problem
§ Separate the problem definition from the search for solution.

2. UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM FULLY

Identify interest needs – Many writers have stressed that a key step in achieving an Integrative Agreement is the ability of the parties to understand and satisfy each others interest.2 Identifying interest is a critical step in the Integrative Negotiation Process. Interests are the underlying concerns, need or desires that motivate a negotiator to take a particular position. However, in as much as satisfaction may be difficult and understanding of the underlying interest may permit them to invent solutions that meet their interest. More so, several types of interests may be at stake in a negotiation and that type may be intrinsic (the parties value it in and of itself) or instrumental (the parties value it because it helps them derive other outcomes in the futures. 3

TYPES OF INTERESTS

§ Substantive Interests - related to the focal issues under negotiation
§ Process Interests are related to the way a dispute is settled
§ Relationship Interests – indicate that one or both parties value their relationship with each other and do not want to take actions that will damage it.
§ Finally, Lax and Sebenius point out that “the parties may have interests in principles concerning what is fair, what is right, what is acceptable, what is ethical, or what has been done in the past and should be done in the future”.

Some observation on Interests
(a) There is almost always more than one type of interest underlying a negotiation
(b) Parties can have different types of interest at stake
(c) Interest often stem from deeply rooted human needs or values
(d) Interest can change
(e) Surfacing Interests is not always easy or to one’s best advantage
(f) Focusing on interests can be harmful
(g) Generate alternative solutions.

The search for alternative is the creative phase of the Integrative Negotiation. Once the parties have agreed on a common definition of the problem and understood each others interests, they need to generate a variety of alternative solution. The objective is to create a list of options or possible solution to the problem; evaluating and selecting from among those options will be their task in the final phase. Several techniques have been suggested to help negotiators generate alternative solutions. These techniques fall into two general categories. 4

i. Redefining the Problem or Problem Set:
This technique call for the parties to define their underlying needs and develop alternatives to meet them. Five different methods for achieving integrative agreements have been proposed and are highlighted below: 5

ii. Expand the pier:
This involves beginning negotiations with shortage of resources, this is not possible for both parties to satisfy their interests or obtain their objectives under current condition. A simple solution is to add resources – expand the pie.

a. Logroll – for logrolling to be successful, parties are required to find more than one issues in conflict and to have different priorities for those issues. 6 Logrolling is frequently done by trial and error as part of the process of experimenting with various packages of offers that will satisfy everyone involved. However, logrolling may be effective when the parties can combine two issues, but not when the parties take turns in successive negotiation.

More so, logrolling is not only effective in inventing options but also as a mechanism to combine options into negotiated packages. Neale and Bazerman identify a variety of approaches in addition to simply combining several issues into a package. 7 Three of these in particular, relate to the matters of outcome probabilities, and timing in other words what is to happen, the likelihood of it happening and when it happens.
b. Exploit differences in risk preference.
c. Exploit differences in time preferences
- Use nonspecific compensation – A third way to generate alternatives is to allow one person to obtain his objectives and pay off the other person for accommodating his interests. For non-specific compensation to work, the person doing the compensating needs to know what is valuable to the other person and how seriously she is inconvenienced.
- Cut the costs for compliance: Through cost cutting, one party achieves her objectives and the others costs are minimized if she agrees to go along.
- Find a bridge solution: This involve a situation whereby parties invent new options that mete all their respective needs.

3. GENERATING ALTRNATIVE SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM AS GIVEN:
In addition to the techniques mentioned above, there are several other approaches to generating alternative solution. These approaches can be used by the negotiators themselves or by a number of other parties. Several of these approaches are commonly used in small groups. These include:

§ Brainstorming: In brainstorming, small groups of people work to generate as many possible solutions to the problem as they can. Someone records; the solutions without comment, as they are identified participants are urged to be spontaneous, even impractical and not to censor anyone’s ideas. The success of brainstorming depends on the amount of intellectual stimulation that occurs as different ideas are generated. The

(a) Avoid judging or evaluating solutions
(b) Separate the people from the problem
(c) Be exhaustive in the brainstorming process
(d) Ask outsider
However, the disadvantage of brainstorming is that it does not solicit the ideas of those who are present at the negotiation.

4. EVALUATE AND SELECT ALTERNATIVES:

The fourth stage in the Integrated Negotiation Process is to evaluate the alternatives generated during the previous phase and to select the best ones to implement. When the challenge is a reasonable, simple one, the evaluation and selection steps may be effectively combined into a singly step. For those uncomfortable with the Integrative Process, though we suggest a close adherence to a series of distinct steps: definitions and standards, alternative, evaluating and selection. The following guidelines should be used in evaluating options and reaching a consensus. 8

§ Narrow the range of solution options
§ Evaluate solution on the basic of quality, and acceptability
§ Agree to the criteria in advance of evaluating options
§ Be willing to justify personal preferences
§ Be alert to the influence of intangibles in selecting options
§ Use subgroups to evaluate complex options
§ Take time out to cool off
§ Explore different ways to logroll.

FACTORS THAT FACILITATE SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION

We have stressed that successful Integrative Negotiation can occur if the parties are predisposed to finding a mutually acceptable joint solution. Many other factors contribute to a predisposition toward problem solving and a willingness to work together to find the best solution. These factors are also the preconditions necessary for more successful integrative negotiation. These factors includes:-
- some common objective or goal
- faith in one’s problem – solving ability
- a belief in the validity of one’s own position and the other’s perspective
- The motivation and commitment to work together.
- Trust
- Clear and accurate communication

In conclusion, whether a negotiation is distributive or integrative, negotiation should focus on substance which will produce a mutually beneficial agreement at lower cost and also focus on relations in which the parties maintain civil relations of mutual recognition and respect and improve their joint problem solving ability.

ENDNOTES
1. Walton and mckersie, 1965
2. Raiffa, 1982
3. Fisher and Ertel, 1998
4. Weingart, Prietula, Heider and Genovese, 1999
5. See Ghosh, 1996
6. See Rapoport, Erev, and Zwick, 1995
7. See Cellich, 1997; Girard, 1989
8. See Aaronson, 1989, Brooks and Odiorne, 1984

STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING



STRATEGY & TACTICS OF DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING

The distributive bargaining competitive, or win-lose, bargaining is a situation where the goals of one party are usually in fundamental and direct conflict with the goals of the other party.
Resources are fixed and limited, and both parties want to maximize their share. As a result, each party will use a set of strategies to maximize his or her share of the outcomes to be obtained. One important strategy is to guard information carefully – one party tries to give information to the other party only when it provides a strategic advantage. Meanwhile, it is highly desirable to get information from the other party to improve negotiation power. Distributive bargaining is basically a competition over who is going to get the most of limited resources, which is often money. Whether or not one of both parties achieve their objectives will depend on the strategies and tactics they employed. 1

For many, the strategies and tactics of distributives bargaining are what negotiation is all about. Others are repelled by distributive bargaining and would rather walk away than negotiate this way they argue that distributive bargaining is old fashioned, needlessly, confrontational and destructive.

There are three reasons that every negotiator should be familiar with Distributive Bargaining. First, negotiators face some interdependent situations, that are distributive, and to do well in them, they need to understand how they work. Second, because many people use Distributive Bargaining strategies and tactics almost exclusively, all negotiators need to understand how to counter their effects. Third, every negotiative situation has the potential to require Distributive Bargaining skills when at the “claiming value” stage 2. Understanding Distributive Bargaining strategies and tactics is important and useful, but negotiators need to recognize that these tactics can also be counter productive and costly. Often they cause negotiating parties to focus so much on their differences that they ignore what they have in common 3. These negative effects notwithstanding, Distributive Bargaining strategies and tactics are quite useful when a negotiator wants to maximize the value obtained in a single deal, when the relationship with the other party is not important, and when they are at the claiming value stage of negotiation.

Before negotiation, both parties to a negotiation should establish their starting, target and resistance point. Starting points are often in the opening statements each party makes (i.e. the seller’s listing price and the buyer’s offer). The target point is usually learned or inferred as negotiations get under way. People typically give up the margin between their starting points and target points as they make concessions. The resistance point, the point beyond which a person will not go and would rather break off negotiations, is not known to the other party and should be kept secret 4.

One party may not learn the other’s party resistance point even after the end of a successful negotiation. After an unsuccessful negotiation, one party may infer that the other’s resistance point was near the last offer the other was willing to consider before the negotiation ended.

The spread between the resistance points, called the bargaining range, settlement range, or zone of potential agreement, is particularly important. In this area, the actual bargaining takes place, for anything outside these points will be summarily rejected between one of the two negotiators. When the buyer’s resistance point is above the seller’s, he is minimally willing to pay more than she is minimally willing to sell.
However, because negotiators don’t begin their deliberation by talking about their resistance points, it is often difficult to know whether a positive settlement range exist until the negotiators get deep into the process. It is worthy of note that, negotiations that started with negative bargaining range are likely to stalemate. Target points, resistance points and initial offers all play on important role in Distributive Bargaining. Target point influence both negotiators outcomes, opening offers play on important role as a warning for the possible presence of hardball tactics5.

In addition to opening bids, target points and resistance points a fourth factor may enter the negotiations: and alternative outcome that can be obtained by completing a deal with someone else. In some negotiations, the parties have only two fundamental choices: (a) reach a deal with the other party, or (b) reach no settlement at all. In other negotiations, however, one or both parties may have the possibility of an alternative deal with another party.

An alternative point can be identical to the resistance point, although the two do not have to be the same. Alternative are important because they give negotiators the power to walk from any negotiation when the emerging deal is not very good. The number of realistic alternatives that negotiators have will vary considerably from one situation to another. In negotiations, where they have many alternatives they can set their goals higher and make fewer concessions. In negotiations where they have no attractive alternatives, such as when dealing with a sole supplier, they have much less bargaining power. Good distributive bargainers identify their realistic alternatives before starting discussions with the other party so that they can properly gauge how firm to be in the negotiation. Good bargainers 6 also try to improve their alternatives while the negotiation is underway.

Negotiators need to ensure that they have a clear understanding of their best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) 7. Having a number of alternatives can be useful, but it is really one’s best alternative that will influence the decision to close a deal or walk away. Negotiators who have stronger BATNAs, that is, very positive alternatives to a negotiated agreement, will have more power throughout the negotiation and accordingly should be able to achieve more of their goals.

In almost all negotiations, agreement is necessary on several issues: the price, the closing date of sales renovation, price of items forgone etc. The package of issues for negotiation is refers to as the barraging mix. Each item in the mix has its own starting target and resistance points. Some items are of obvious importance to both parties, others are important only to one party. Negotiators need to understand what is important to them and to the other party and they need to take these priorities into account during the planning process 8.

Within the fundamental strategies of distributive bargaining, there are four important tactical tasks, concerned with targets, resistance points, and the cost of terminating negotiations for a negotiator in a Distributive Bargaining situation to consider:
· Assess the other party’s target, resistance point, and cost of terminating negotiations
· Manager the other party’s impression of the negotiators’ target, resistance point and cost of terminating negotiation.
· Modify the other party’s perception of his or her own target, resistance point and cost of terminating negotiation and
· Manipulate the actual cost of delaying in terminating negotiations.

POSITION TAKEN DURING NEGOTIATION
Effective distributive bargainers need to understand the process of taking positions during bargaining, including the importance of the opening offer and opening stance and the role of making concessions throughout the negotiation process. 9 At the beginning of negotiations, each party takes a position. Typically, one party will then change his or her position in response to information from the other party or in response to the other party’s behaviour. Changes in position are usually accompanied by new information concerning the other’s intentions, the value of outcomes and likely zones for settlement. Negotiation is interactive. It provides an opportunity for both sides to communicate information about their positions that may lead to change in those positions.

Opening Offer

When negotiation begins, the negotiator is faced with a perplexing problem. What should the opening offer be?

Research by Adam Galinsky and Thomas Mussiveiler suggest that making the first offer in a negotiation is advantageous to the negotiator making the offer. 10 It appears that first offer can anchor a negotiation especially when information about alternative negotiation outcome is not considered. Negotiator can dampen “first offer effect” by the other negotiator, however, by concentrating on their won target and focusing on the other negotiator’s resistance point.

A second decision to be made at the outset of Distributive Bargaining concerns the stance or attitude to adopt during the negotiation. Will you be competitive (fighting to get the best on every point) or moderate (willing to make concessions and compromise?). Some negotiators take belligerent stance, the other party may mirror the initial stance, meeting belligerent stance with belligerence. It is important for negotiators to think carefully about the message that they wish to signal with their opening because there is a tendency for negotiators to respond in kind to distributive tactics in negotiation11. That is negotiators tend to match distributive tactics from the other party with their own distributive tactics, so negotiators should make conscious decision about what they are signaling to the other party with their opening stance and subsequent concession.

An opening offer is usually met with a counter offers and these two offers define the initial bargaining rang. Sometime the other party will not counter offer but will simply state that the first offer is unacceptable and ask the opener to come back with a more reasonable set of proposals. Note that it is not an option to escalate one’s opening offer that is, to set an offer further away form the other party’s target point that one’s first offer. Opening offers, opening stance, and initial concessions are elements at the beginning of a negotiation that parties can use to communicate how they intend to negotiate an exaggerated opening offer, a determined opening stand, and a very small opening concession signal a position of firmness. Firmness can create a climate in which the other party may decide that concessions are so meager that he or she might as well capitulate and settle quickly rather than drag things out. Paradoxically, firmness may actually shorten negotiation12

However, negotiations can be flexible. There are several good reasons for adopting a flexible position. 13 First, when taking different stances throughout the negotiation, one can learn about the other party’s target and perceived possibilities by observing how he or she respond to different proposals. Negotiators may want to establish a comparative rather than a competitive relationship, hoping to get a better agreement. In addition, flexibility keeps the negotiations proceeding; the more flexible one seems the more the other party will believe that a settlement is possible.

Final Offers

Eventually a negotiator wants to convey the message that there is no further room for movement that the present offer is the final one. A good negotiator will say, “this is all I can do” or “this is as far as I can go”. Sometimes, however, it is clear that a simple statement will not suffice; an alternative is to use concessions to convey the point. The final offer has to be large enough to be dramatic yet not so large that it creates the suspicion that the negotiator has been holding back and that there is more available on other issues in the bargaining mix. 14

Closing the Deal
After negotiating for a period of time, and learning about the other party’s needs, positions, and perhaps resistance point, the next challenge for a negotiator is to close the agreement. Several tactics are available to negotiators for closing a deal, 15 choosing the best tactic for a given negotiation is as much as a matter of art as science. These tactics are:

§ Provide Alternatives
§ Assume the Close
§ Split the Difference
§ Exploding Offers
§ Sweeteners

Hardball Tactics

We now turn to a discussion of hardball tactics in negotiation. Many popular books of negotiation discuss using hardball negation tactics to beat the other party. 16 Such tactics are designed to pressure negotiators to do things they would not otherwise do and their presence usually disguises the user’s adherence to a decidedly distributive bargaining approach. They also can backfire, and there is evidence that every adversarial negotiator is not effective negotiators. 17 Many negotiators consider these tactics out-of-bounds for any negotiation situation. 18
The followings are the hardball tactics

§ Dealing with Typical Hardball Tactics
§ Ignore Them
§ Discuss Them
§ Respond in Kind
§ Co-opt the Other Party
§ Typical Hardball Tactic
§ Good Cop-Bad Cop
§ Lowball/Highball
§ Bogey
§ The Nibble
§ Chicken
§ Intimidation
§ Aggressive Behaviour
§ Snow Job

CONCLUSION:
On the final analysis, Distributive Bargaining Tactics and Strategies discussed above is intended to help negotiators understand the dynamics of Distributive Bargaining and thereby obtain a better deal. A thorough understanding of these concepts will allow negotiators who are not by nature not comfortable with Distributive Bargaining to manage distributive situations proactively.

ENDNOTES
1. Walton and mckersie, 1965
2. See lax and sebenius, 1986
3. Thompson and Hoebec, 1996
4. Missner, 1980
5. Raiffa, 1982
6. Fisher and Ertel, 1998
7. Fisher, Ury and Patton, 1991
8. Watkins, 2002
9. Tutzaver, 1992
10. Galinsky and Mussweiler, 2001
11. Weingart, Prietula, Heider and Genovese, 1999
12. See Ghosh, 1996
13. See Rapoport, Erev, and Zwick, 1995
14. Walton and Mckersie, 1965
15. See Cellich, 1997; Girard, 1989
16. See Aaronson, 1989, Brooks and Odiorne, 1984
17. Girard, 1989
18. Carr, 1968
19. See Fisher, Ury and Patton, 1991

Saturday, October 10, 2009

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION


DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
After data have been collected from a representative sample of the population, the next step is to analyse them to the research hypotheses. Data are obtained through questionnaire, interviews, observation, or through secondary sources, need to be edited. The blank responses, if any have to be handled in some way, the data coded, and a categorization scheme has to be set up. The data will then have to be keyed in, and some software program used to analyse them. Each of these stages of data preparation is listed below.
Editing data
Handling blank responses
Coding
Categorization
Entering data
In data analysis we have three objective: the first is getting a feel for the data, which gives preliminary ideas of how good the scale are, how well the coding and entering of data have been, and so on. The second objective—testing the goodness of data—can be accomplished by submitting the data for factor analysis, obtaining the Cronbach’s alpha or the spilt-half reliability of the measure, and so on. The third objective—hypotheses testing—is achieve by choosing the appropriate menus of the software programs, to test each of the hypotheses using the relevant statistical test. The research of these tests will determine whether or not the hypotheses are substantiated.
SOME SOFTWARE PACKAGES USEFUL FOR DATA ANYLYSIS
Spss software packages
SPSS has software that can create surveys (questionnaires design) through the spss data entry builder, collect data over the internet through the spss data entry server, enters the data through the spss data entry station, and spss 11.0 to analyse the data collected.

RESEARCH DESIGNS



RASEARCH DESIGNS
Experimental design, as we know, are setup to examine possible cause and effect of relationships among variables, in contrast to correlational studies, which examine the relationships among variables without necessarily trying to establish if one variable causes another. Experimental design fall into two categories: experimental done in an artificial or contrived environment, known as lab experiment, and those done in the natural environment in which activities regularly take place known as the field experiment.
THE LAB EXPERIMENT:
As stated earlier, when a cause-and-effect relationship between an independent variables and dependent variable of interest is to be clearly established, then all other variables that might contaminate or confound the relationship have to be tightly controlled. In other words, the possible effects of other variables on the dependent variable have to be accounted for in some ways, so that the actually cause effects of the investigated independent variable on the dependent variable can be determined. It is also necessary to manipulate the independent variable so that the extent of its causal effects can be established. The controls and manipulations are best done in an artificial setting (the laboratory), where the causal effects can be tested. When controls and manipulations are introduced to establish cause-and -effect relationships in an artificial setting, we have laboratory designs, also known as lab experiments.
THE FIELD EXPERIMENT:
A field experiment, as the name implies, is an experiment done in the natural environment in which work goes on as usual, but treatments are given to one or more groups. Thus in the field experiment, even though it may not be possible to control all the nuisance variables because members cannot be either randomly assigned to groups, or matched, the treatment can still be manipulated. Control groups could also be set up in the field experiment. The experiment and the control groups in the field experiment could be made up of the people working at several plants within a certain radius, or from different shift in the same plant, or in some other ways. If there are three different shifts in production plant, for instance, and the effects of the piece-rate system are to be studied, one of the shift can be used as the control group, and the two other shift given two different treatments or the same treatment—that is, different piece-rates the same piece-rate. Any cause –and –effect relationship found under these conditions would have wider generalizability to other similar production setting; even though we may not be sure to what extent the piece-rates alone were the cause of the increase in productivity, because some of the other confounding variables could not be controlled.





TYPES OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
Quasi-experimental design
Pre-test and post-test experimental group design
True experimental design
Solomon four-group design
Ex post facto designs
ETHICAL ISSUES IN EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN RESEARCH
It is appropriate at this juncture to briefly discuss a few of the many ethical issues involve in doing research, some of which are particularly relevant to conducting lab experiment. The following are practices are considered unethical:
1. Putting pressure on individuals to participate in experiments through coercion, or applying social pressure.
2. Giving mental task and asking demeaning questions diminish their self-respect.
3. Deceiving subject by deliberately misleading them as to the true purpose of the research.
4. Exposing participants to mental and physical stress.
5. Not allowing subject to withdraw from the research when they want to.
6. Using the research results to disadvantage the participants, or for the purpose not to their liking.
7. Exposing respondents to hazardous and unsafe environments.
8. Not debriefing the participants fully accurately after the experiment is over.
9. Not preserving the privacy and confidentiality of the information given by the participants.
10. Withholding benefits from control groups.
SIMULATION:
An alternative to lab and field experiment currently being used in business research is simulation. Simulation uses are model-building techniques to determine the effects of changes, and computer-based simulation is becoming popular in business research. A simulation can be thought of as an experiment conducted in a specially created setting that very closely represent the natural environment in which activities are usually carried on. In that sense, simulation lies somewhere between a lab and a field experiment, insofar as the environment is artificially created but not far different from reality.However, before using experimental design in research study, it is essential to consider whether they are necessary at all, and if so, at what level of sophistication. This is because experimental designs call for special effort and varying degrees of interference with the natural flow activities.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

MANAGERIAL DECISION-MAKING AND RESEARCH



MANAGERIAL DECISION MAKING AND RESEARCH
Managers wrestle with a multitude of problems—big and small—in everyday work life. The different between a successful and not so successful organization lies in the quality of decisions made by the managers in the system. We have seen that scientific thinking equips managers with an awareness and comprehension of the multiplicity of factors operating in their work environment. It also gears managers to problem solving objectivity, after taking calculated risk, and all in all, making good decisions after weighing the alternatives. Does this mean that once the manager applies scientific research result to decision making that the decisions so made are always going to be right?
No, for various reasons. First, there is always a 5% chance of making a Type 1 error; that is, accepting the null hypothesis when it should be rejected. Second, though research results may offer the directions for change, sound common sense should be the guiding light for good decision making. Thus, good decision making entails a common sense approach to applying research results.
To sum up, research is the scientific path that leads the manager to decision making, and experience and common sense are the beams of light that guide managers to solve problems sensibly. Experience is the cumulative knowledge gained from the outcomes of past problem-solving endeavours. Such experience might be the result of a trial-and-error mode of operation in the past, leading to an understanding of what works and what does not. The questions then arise, why not be guided by the past experience and common sense alone? Why go through the rigorous scientific process of research?
Scientific research is important for several reasons. It is only through scientific thinking process that we come to understand, and take into consideration, the complex text set of factors that operates in any given problem situation. Research also exposes us to the ever increasing advances in technology. Today, the managers can find facts that are material to the business—nationally and globally—by simply using the internet. Vast masses of company data also become available to the managers, on practically any aspects of the company’s multifarious operations, through a good information system and data warehouse installed in the company’s information technology system. Managers also have solved simple, repetitive problems by using the menu-driven Expert System. Such technology was not perfected even a couple of decades ago.
True, managers cannot solve every problem by doing scientific research themselves. Often internal research teams help in conducting research to find the answers to problems or outside researchers are hired for the purpose. In either case, knowledge of research or the scientific thinking process helps the managers to understand each step taken by the researcher, and enhance the quality of the decisions made. This is primarily due to the fact that the content of the research report, on submission, are meaningfully grasped. As a meter of fact, a good research report itself may very well be at least in part the result of a knowledgeable manager interacting effectively with the researcher.
Good decision making, as we have seen is a function of thoroughly understanding and using the finding of the research, carefully weighing the various recommendations made, taking experience as a guide, and recognizing the organizational culture and the values of the system. Ethical behaviour dictates that the manager applies research findings for the benefit of the organization, even if they clash with his or her own personal goals and ambitions. Govern by a sense of fairness and ethics, the manager instituting the study must, in such a case, subordinate self to organizational interests.

THE RESEARCH REPORT



THE RESEARCH REPORT
Before any research study is undertaken, there should be an agreement between the person who authorizes the study and the researcher as to the problem to be investigated, the methodology to be used, the duration of the study, and the cost. This ensures that there are no misunderstandings or frustrations later for both parties. This is usually accomplished through the research proposal, which the researcher submits and gets approved by the sponsors, who issue a letter authorization to proceed with the study. The research proposal; drawn up by the investigator is a result of a planned, organized, and careful effort, and basically contains the following:
1. The broad goals of the study.
2. The specific problem to be investigated.
3. Details of the procedures to be followed.
4. The research design offering details on:
a. The sampling design
b. Data collection methods
c. Data analysis
d. Time frame of the study
e. The budget


It is important that the result of the study and the recommendations to solve the problems are effectively communicated to the sponsor, so that the suggestions made are accepted and implemented. Otherwise, all the effort hitherto expended on the investigation would be in vain. Writing the report concisely, convincingly, and with clarity is perhaps as important, if not more, than conducting a perfect research study. Hence a well-thought-out written report and oral presentation are critical. The written report enables the manager to weigh the facts and arguments presented therein, and implement the acceptable recommendations, with a view to closing the gap between the existing state of affairs and the desire state. To achieve its goals, the written report has to focus on:
The written report and its purpose
Characteristics of the written report
Contents of the research report
ORAL PRESENTATION:
Usually organizations require about a 20-minute oral presentation of the research project, followed by a question and answer session. The oral presentation calls for considerable planning. Imagine a study that spanned over several months to be presented in 20 minutes to a live audience! The challenge exists to present the important aspects of the study so as to hold the interest of the audience. To make this possible, time and effort have to be expended on planning, organizing, and rehearsing the presentation.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

MEASUREMENT: SCALING, RELIABILITY, VALIDITY



MEASUREMENT: SCALING, RELIABILITY, VALIDITY
Now that we know the four different types of scales that can be used to measure operationally defined dimensions and elements of variables, it is necessary to examine the methods of scaling that is assigning number and symbols to elicit the attitudinal responses of subjects toward objects, events, or persons. There are two categories of attitudinal scales—the rating scale and the ranking scale. Rating scales have several responses categories and are used to elicit responses with regard to the object, event, or person studied. Ranking on the other hand, make comparisons between or among objects, events, or persons and elicit the preferred choices and ranking among them.
The following ratings are often used in organizational research:
Dichotomous scale
Category scale
Likert scale
Numerical scale
Semantic differential scale
Itemized rating scale
Fixed or constant sum rating scale
Staple scale
Graphic rating scale
Consensus scale
As mentioned ealier, ranking scales are used to tap preferences between two or among more objects or items (ordinal in nature) however, such ranking may not give definitive clues to some of the answers sought. Ranking scales include:
Paired comparisons
Forced choice
Comparative scale
RELIABILITY: the reliability of a measure indicates the extent to which it s without bias (error free) and hence ensures consistent measurement across time and across the various items in the instrument. In other words, the reliability of a measure is an indication of the stability and consistency with which the instrument measures the concept and helps to assess the “goodness” of a measure.
VALIDITY: this is concerned with the issues of authenticity of the cause-and-effect relationships (internal validity), and there generalizability to the external environment (external validity).several types of validity tests are used to test the goodness of measures and writers used different terms to denotes them. For the sake of clarity, we may group validity tests under three broad headings:
Content validity
Criterion-related validity
And, construct validity.
GOODNESS OF MEASURES: These involve the certainty that the instrument used in research do indeed measure the variables they are supposed to, and that they measure them accurately.
Endnote
Sekaran, Uma. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach.
(4th Ed.) Hoboken, N. J.: Wiley.

MEASUREMENT OF VARIABLES



MEASUREMENT OF VARIABLES: OPERATIONAL FINITION AND SCALE
Measurement of the variables in the theoretical framework is an integral part of research and an important aspect of research design. Unless the variables are measured in some ways, we will not be able to test our hypothesis and find answers to complex research issues. Objects that can be physically measured by some calibrated instruments pose no measurement problem. One can also check the company records to obtain or verify certain types of information. But when we get to the realm of people’s subjective feelings, attitudes, and perceptions, the measurement of these factors or variables becomes difficult. This is one of the aspects of organizational behaviour and management research that adds to the complexity of research study.
There at least two types of variables: one lends itself to objective and precise measurement; the other is nebulous and does not lend itself to accurate measurement because of its subjective nature. However, despite the lack of physical measuring devices to measure the latter type, there are ways of tapping the subjective feelings and perceptions of individuals. One technique is to reduce the abstract notions or concepts to observable behaviour and characteristics. The reduction of abstract concepts to render them measurable in a tangible way is what is called operationalizing the concepts.
operationalzing or operationally defining a concept to render it measurable, is done by looking at the behavioural dimensions, facts ,or properties denoted by the concept. These are them translate into observable and measurable elements so as to develop an index of measurement of the concept. However, just as it is to understand what an operational definition is, equally important is it to remember what it is not. An operational definition does not describe the correlate of the concept. Thus, it is clear that operationally defining a concept does not consist of delineating the reason, antecedents, consequences, or correlates of the concepts. Rather, it describes its observable characteristics in order to be able to measure the concept. It is important to remember this because if we either operationalize the concepts incorrectly or confuse them with other concepts, then we will not have valid measures. This mean that we will not have good data and our research will not be scientific.
SCALES
Now that we have learned how to operationalize concepts, we need to measure them in some manner. To this end ,we will name types of scales that can be applied to measure different variables. As scale is a tool or mechanism by which individuals are distinguished as to how they differ from one another on the variables of interest to our study. The scale or tool could be a gross one ion the sense that it would only broadly categorize individuals on certain variables, or it could be a fine-tuned tool that would differentiate individuals on the variables with varying degrees of sophistication. There are four basic types of scales:
Nominal scale
Ordinal scale
Interval scale
And ratio scale
A nominal scale :is one that allows the researcher to assign subjects to certain categories or groups. For example, with respect to the variable of gender, respondent can be grouped into two categories--male and female.
An ordinal scale not only categorizes the variables in such a way as to denote differences among the various categories, it also rank-orders the categories in some meaningful way.
An interval scale allows us to perform certain arithmetical operations on the data collected from the respondents.
Ratio scale overcomes the disadvantages of the arbitrary origin point of the interval scale, in that it has an absolute (in contrast to an arbitrary) zero point, which is a meaningful measurement point.
From the foregoing, we could see that knowledge of operationalization of a concept and the type of scale to use for purposes of categorizing ,rank-ordering, and tapping variables to varying degrees of sophistication, helps managers to undertake small surveys on their own, without much difficulty.
Endnote
Sekaran, Uma. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach.
(4th ed.) Hoboken, N. J.: Wiley.

SAMPLING



SAMPLING
Sampling is the process of selecting a sufficient number of elements from the population, so that a study of the sample and an understanding of its propreties.In learning how representative data (i.e., as reflected in the universe)can be collected, a few terms as described below ,have to be first understood.
SAMPLE: A sample is a subset of the population. It comprises some members selected from it. In other words, some, not all, elements of the population would form the sample.
POPULATION: Population refers to the entire group of people.
ELEMENT: An element is a single member of the population.
SUBJECT: A is a single member of the sample, just as an element is a single member of the population.
POPULATION FRAME: The population frame is a listing of all the elements in the population from which the sample is drawn
SAMPLING DESIGN
There are two types of sampling designs: probability and nonprobability sampling, in probability sampling, the elements in the population have some known chance or probability of being selected as sample subjects i.e. unrestricted (simple random sampling) or restricted (complex probability sampling. In nonprobability sampling, the elements do not have a known or predetermined chance of being selected as subjects. I.e. convenience sampling, purposive sampling, judgment sampling, quota sampling.
PROBANILITY SAMPLING: Advantages
High generalizability of findings.
Easy to use if population frame is available.
Most efficient among all probability designs.
All groups are adequately sampled and comparison among groups are possible.
In geography cluster, costs of data collection are low.
Area sampling is cost-effective. Useful for decision relating to a particular location.
Offer more detailed information on the topic of study.
Disadvantages
Not as efficient as stratified sampling
Systematic biases are possible
More time consuming than simple random sampling design since subsets of clusters are more homogeneous than heterogeneous.
Original biases, if any, will be carried over.
Individual may not be happy responding the second time.
NONPROBABILITY SAMPLING: Advantages
Quick and convenient
Less expensive
Sometimes the only meaningful way to investigate
Very useful where minority participation in a study is critical
Disadvantages
Not generalizable at all.
ISSEUS OF PRECISION AND CONVIDENCE IN DETERMINIG SAMPLING
Having discussed the various probability and nonprobability sampling designs, we now need to focus attention on the second aspects of the sampling design issue—sample size. Suppose we select 30 people from a population of 3,000through a simple random sampling procedure. Will we able to generalize our findings to the population with confidence, since we have chosen a probability design that has the most generalizability? What is the sample size that would be required to make reasonable precise generalizations with confidence? What do precision mean and confidence mean? These issues will be considered
PRECISION: this is refers to how close our estimate is to the true population characteristic. Usually, we would estimate the population parameter to fall within a range, based on the sample estimate.
CONFIDENCE: this denotes how certain we are that our estimate will really hold true for the population. In essence, confidence reflects the level of certainty with which we can state that our estimates of the population parameters, based on our sample statistics will hold true.
EFFICIENCY IN SAMPLING
Efficiency in sampling is attained when for a given level of precision (standard error), the sample size could be reduced, or for a given sample size (n), the level of precision could be increased. Some probability sampling designs are more efficient than others. The simple random sampling procedure is not always the more efficient plan to adopt; some other probability sampling designs are often more efficient. A stratified random sampling plan is often the most efficient, and a disproportionate stratified random sampling design has been shown to be more efficient than a proportionate sampling design in many cases. Cluster sampling is less efficient than simple random sampling because there is generally more homogeneity among the subjects in the cluster than is found in the elements in the population. Multistage cluster sampling is more efficient than single-stage cluster sampling when there is more heterogeneity found in the earlier stages. There is often a trade-off between time and cost efficiencies and precision efficiencies. The choice of sampling plan thus depends on the objectives of the research, as well as on the extent and nature of efficiency desire.
MANAGERIAL RELEVANCE
Awareness of sampling designs and sample size help managers to understand why a particular method of sampling is used by researcher. It also facilitates understanding of the cost implications of different designs, and the trade-off between precision and confidence vis-a-vis the costs. This enables the managers to understand the risk they take in implementing changes based on the results of the research study.
Lastly, sampling design decisions are important aspects of research design and include both the sampling plan to be used and the sample size that will be needed. However, care should be taken not to overgeneralize the results of any study to population that are not represented by the sample. This is a problem common in some research studies.
Endnote
Sekaran, Uma. (2003).Research methods for business: A skill-building approach.
(4th Ed.) Hoboken, N. J.: Wiley.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

DATA COLLECTION METHODS



DATA COLLECTION METHODS
Data can be defined as facts or information especially when examined and used to find out things or to make decisions.
Sources of data
Primary data
Secondary data
Primary data refer to information obtained firsthand by the researcher on the variables of interest for the specific purpose of the study.
Types of primary data
INTERVIEWS (structured and unstructured)
Face-face interviews
Telephone interviews
Computer based-assisted interview
Interviews from electronic media
Internet
FACE-FACE INTERVIEWS: Advantages;
The main advantage of face-face interviews or direct interviews is that the researcher can adapt the questions as necessary, clarify doubt, and ensure that the responses are properly understood, by repeating or rephrasing the questions. The researcher can also pick up nonverbal cues from the respondent. Any discomfort, stress, or problems that the respondent experiences can be detected. This would be impossible to detect in a telephone interview.
Disadvantages
The main disadvantages of face-face interviews are the geographical limitations they may impose on the surveys and the vast resources needed if such surveys need to be nationally or internationally. Another drawback is that respondents might feel uneasy about the anonymity of their responses when they interact face to face with interviewer.
TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS: Advantages
The main advantages of telephone interviewing, from the researcher’ point of view, is that a number of different people can be reached in a relatively short period of time. From the respondents’ point of view, it would eliminate any discomfort that some of them might feel in facing the interviewer.
Disadvantages
The main disadvantage of telephone interviewing is that the respondent could unilateral terminate the interview. Caller ID might further aggravate the situation.
CUMPUTER-ASSISTED INTERVIEWING
With the modern technology, questions are flashed onto the computer screen and the interviewers can enter the answer of the respondents directly in to the computer. The accuracy of the data collection is considerably enhanced since the software can be programmed to flag the “offbase” or or “out of rage” responces.CAI also prevent the respondents from asking the wrong questions or in the wrong sequence since the questions are automatically flashed to the respondents in an ordered sequence.
Advantages
Computer vastly eases the job of the interviewer.
Fast
Convenient
Disadvantage
Tedious
Sometime time consuming.
QUESTIONAIRES: A questionnaires is a preformulated set of questions to which respondent’s records their answer, usually within rather closely define alternatives.questionaires are efficient data collection mechanisms when the researcher knows exactly what is required and how to measure the variables of interest. Questionnaires can be administered;
Personally
Mail to the respondents
Electronically distributed
OBSERVATIONAL SURVEY:
Whereas interviews and questionnaires elicit responses from the subject; it is possible to gather data without asking questions of respondets.People can be observed in their natural work environment or in the lab setting, and their activities and behaviours or other items of interest can be noted and recorded. Also their movements, work habits ,the statements made and the meeting conducted by them, their facial expressions of joy, anger ,and other emotions, and body language can be observed. The researcher can play one of two roles while gathering field observational data—that of nonparticipant-observer or participant-observer.


Advantages of observational studies
The data are more reliable and free from respondents’ biases.
It is easy to note environmental influences.
Easy to observe certain individuals
Disadvantages
The method is slow, tedious and expensive.
Though mood, feelings, and attitudes can be guess, but the cognitive thought process of individuals cannot be captured.
Because of long period involve, fatigue may set in which might bias the recorded data.
MULTIMETHODS OF DATA COLLECTION
Because almost all data collection methods have some biases associated with them, collecting data through multimethods and from multiple sources lend rigor to research.Likewise, data obtained from several sources bear a great degree of similarity. We would have stronger conviction in the goodness of the data.Therefore; high correlations among data obtained on the same variables from different sources and through different collection methods lend more credibility to the research instrument and to the data obtained through these instruments. Good research entails collection of data from multiple sources and through multiple data collection methods, such research, though, would be more costly and time consuming.
Endnote
Sekaran, Uma. (2003).Research methods for business: A skill-building approach.
(4th Ed) Hoboken, N. J.: Wiley.

THE RESEARCH PROCESS step 6.



THE RESEARCH PROCESSS
STEP6: element of research design
The research design is an activity which involves a series of rational decision-making of choices.specifically, there are six basic aspects of research design, and these are:
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: exploratory, descriptive, hypothesis testing, and case study analysis.
EXTENT OF THE RESEARCHER INTERFERNCE WITH THE STUDY: minimal, moderate, excessive.
THE STUDY SETTING: field study, field experiments, lab experiments.
THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS: individuals, dyads, groups, organizations, cultures.
TYPES OF INVESTIGATION: casual, correlation.
TIME HORIZON: cross-sectional, longitudinal.
THE MANAGERIAL IMPLICATINS
Knowledge about research issues help the manager to understand what the researcher is attempting to do. the manager also understand why the reports sometimes indicate data analytic results based on small sample size, when a lot of time has been spent in collecting data from several sources of individuals, as in the case of studies involving groups, departments, or branch offices.
Also knowledge about research design help managers to understand the main difference between casual and correlational studies, and afforded the managers the trouble of falling into trap of making implicit assumption when two variables are only associated with each other.Furthemore, it also help managers to be economical in making research study decisions. Knowing that more rigorous research designs consume more resources, the manager is in a position to weigh the gravity of the problem experienced and decide what kind of design would yield acceptable results in an efficient manner.
Lastly, knowledge of design research details help managers to study and intelligently comment on research proposals.
Endnote
Skaran, Uma. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach.
(4th Ed.) Hoboken, N. J.: Wiley.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

ESTABLISHING LEADERSHIP THROUGH STRATEGIC INTERNAL COMMUNICATION



ESTABLISHING LEADERSHIP THROUGH STRATEGIC INTERNAL COMMUNICATION
One of the major responsibilities of an organization leader is communication with the employees. By communicating effectively with the employees, leaders are not simply creating ambassadors of goodwill for their company; they are providing direction, establishing a positive and productive working environment, and influencing their bottom lines. Organizational direction comes from leaders having created and effectively communicated a clear and meaningful vision. Developing and communicating a vision is one of the most important and visible communication tasks of senior management. Employees are motivated when, through words and actions, the leaders carefully translate the vision and strategic goals into terms that are meaningful to all employees. To do so requires analyzing audiences, targeting messages, and creating communicating strategy. Motivating employees also requires listening to them and using emotional intelligence to connect with them.
ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE INTERNAL COMMUNICATION
Although creating the internal messages that are to be sent to your employees is your primary leadership responsibility, you also need ton pay attention to the other main components of any good communication strategy in your effort to ensure your internal communication supports and assists in accomplishing your company strategy. To ensure your internal communication is comprehensive, you will want to use an analytical approach to developing a communication strategy for your important communication. In establishing an effective internal communication, the strategic employee communication model has been developed to help leaders. At its core, the model shows that effective internal communication consists of the following.
supportive management
targeted messages
effective media
well-positioned staff
ongoing assessment.
USING MISSION AND VISION TO STRENGTHEN INTERNAL COMMUNICATION
The strategic employees communication model provides an analytically rigorous approach to internal communication that works particularly well with the process side of communication, such as media selection, supportive management ,and ongoing assessment.Missions,visions,value, ands guiding principles make up one category of major strategic messages that most organizations convey to their employees. Leadership communication must include how best to create and deliver these core messages to ensure they are strong and meaningful And not simply feeble slogans good only for adoring coffee cups.However,for visions and missions to achieve its goal, the following questions must be asked:
Why are missions and vision important?
What are missions and visions?
When are they most effective?
How do you build them?
MISSIONS:
A mission is a statement of the reason a company exists that is intended primarily for internal use. It should ensure that employees understand the company’s purpose by defining a company’ basic business.
VISSIONS:
A vision statement establishes the company’s aspirations. It describes as inspiring new reality, achievable in a well –understood and reasonable time frame. Companies often use visions for internal and external audiences, although their greatest purpose is usually to guide internal actions.
DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING EFFECTIVE CHANGE COMMUNICATION
Organizational change is inevitable yet rarely easy. Many change efforts fail to deliver the value the company seeks. The greatest difficulty leaders’ face in bringing about change involves the people. For instance, merger and acquisition are one of the most frequent causes of major organizational change, but only few yield the anticipated or hoped results. The organization’s leaders bear the primary responsibility for successfully communicating the rationale for the change, the implementation plans, and the impact on the company as a whole on the individual employees, the leaders will need to decide how much communication will be enough and to establish how to manage the change communication effectively. The following will help leaders in managing change in communication; leaders should:
Determine the scope of the change communication program.
Structure a communication program for major change.
Endnote
Deborah J. Barret.

BUILDING AND LEADING HIGH-PERFORMING TEAMS



BUILDING AND LEADING HIGH-PERFORMANCE TEAMS
Since teams are now so prevalence in all organizations, business leaders need to know how to build and how to manage them to achieve high performance .building an effective team raise both organization and individual leadership issues. Deciding to form a team is a process very similar to deciding to call a meeting. In deciding to use teams across your company, or to form teams individually, you will need to consider certain factors which may include whether a team approach is the best to achieve the organizational goals or a specific objectives or targeted result. Another factor to consider is whether the company provide the necessary training in diversity, team dynamics, problem solving, and process management to ensure team members know how to manage team issues and processes. More so, the employee’s ability to follow team charters, ground rules, and also knows how to manage team conflicts need to be considered. Other factors are whether the current company technology support team communication and collaboration and the ability of the employees to use it, and the compensation and performance measure of the company.
ESTABLISHING THE NECESSARY TEAM WORK PROCESSES
Once a team has been formed, establishing a necessary team work process is the next task for a leader. The following are the necessary team work processes:
Organize or hold an official launch
Lead the team through to the commitment side of the team basic framework which include;
Purpose
Goals
Approach
Creating team charter
Action plan
And, work plan.
MANAGING THE PEOPLE SIDE OF TEAMS
Teams bring together the best talents available to solve problems; however, sometimes these talented people clash. One way to improve the team’s emotional intelligence or ability to work together smoothly is for the team to take time to know something about each other’s current situation, work experiences, personality and cultural differences. This knowledge may not result in team bounding or friendship, which are more the by-product of teams than the goals, but since these softer issues influence how the person behaves as a team member, the knowledge can help the team avoid conflicts and help you as a leader anticipate any problems or performance roadblocks.
Although team members will get to know each other through day-to-day interaction while working together, the team member can shorten the learning curve by discussing the following information at the first team meeting.
1. Position and responsibilities
2. Team experiences
3. Expectation
4. Personality
5. Cultural differences
HANDLING TEAM ISSUE AND COFLICT
Despite all of the best planning and time spent getting to know each other, teams will likely experience conflict. Some of it will be useful and some not, but the odds are that it will occur. As Katzenbach writes, an effective team is “about hard work, conflict, integration, and collective results”. working on a team is not easy, but the benefits can be very rewarding for the team members, and the results can be much better for the company. Obtaining the best results can depend on the team’s ability to manage conflict. Just as individuals, teams disagree in meetings, however, team need to know how to manage conflict in their overall team activities.
TYPES OF TEAM CONFLICT
Internal team conflict will usually be one of the four:
Analytical (team’s constructive disagreement over a project issue or problem)
Task (goal, work process, deliverables)
Interpersonal (personality, diversity, communication style)
Roles (leadership, responsibilities, power struggles)
APPROACHES TO HANDLING TAEM CONFLICT
Most teams will use one of the following three approaches to manage conflict
One on one: individuals involved work it out between themselves.
Facilitation: individuals involved work with a facilitator (mediator)
Team: individuals involved discuss it with the entire team
VIRTUAL TEAMS
Virtual teams are teams whose members are geographically disperse and rely primarily on technology (telephone, computer, video, or some combinations) for communication and to accomplish their work as team. The geographical separation can range from global dispersion to simply being in different location within a single company facility.


ADVANTAGES OF VIRTUAL TEAM
Lowering travel and facility costs
Reducing project schedules
Allowing the leveraging of expertise and vertical integration
Improving efficiency
And, positioning to compete globally.
More openness
Flexibility
Diversity
Access to information.
DISADVANTAGES OF VIRTUAL TEAM
On the other hand, virtual teams also provide challenges, particularly in communication:
Much of the context of communication, so important in high-context societies, is lost.
Cultural differences can become amplified, and personality conflicts more pronounced.
Connection and trust are difficult to build in a virtual environment which may put the team on a “collision course”
ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGES OF VIRTUAL TEAMS
A virtual team need the following to be successful:
Shared beliefs
A storehouse of credibility and trust
And, a shared work space

Monday, September 21, 2009

PERCEPTION ,COGNITION,AND EMOTION



PERCEPTION, COGNITION, AND EMOTION
Perception, cognition and emotion are the building blocks of all social encounters, including negotiation, in the sense that our social actions are guided by how we perceive and analyze the other party, the situation, and our interests and positions. A working knowledge of how humans perceive and process information is important to understand why people behave the way they do during negotiations.
Perception can be defined as the process by which individuals connect to their environment. The process of ascribing meaning to messages and events is strongly influenced by the perceiver’s current state of mind, role, and comprehension of earlier communications.1 Other parties’ perceptions, the environment, and the perceiver’s disposition are also important influence on one’s ability to interpret with accuracy what the other party is saying and meaning.
PERCEPTION DISTORTION
In any given negotiation, the perceiver’s own needs, desire, motivations, and personal experiences may create a predisposition about the other party. This is cause for concern when it leads to biases and errors in perception and subsequent communication. However, there are four types of perception errors;
Stereotyping
Hallo effects
Selective perception
And, projection.
FRAMING
A key issue in perception and negotiation is framing. A frame is the subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense out of situation, leading them to pursue or avoid subsequent actions.2 Frames are important in negotiation because “people can encounter the same dispute and perceive it in very different ways as a result of their background, professional training or past experiences”3.Aframe is a way of labelling these different individual interpretations of the situation.
Types of frames;
Substantive
Outcome
Aspiration
Process
Identity
Characterization
Loss—gain—low
COGNITIVE BIASES IN NEGOTIATION
A cognitive bias in negotiation is the systematic information processing errors that negotiators make and that may compromise negotiation performance. Thus, rather than being perfect processers of information, it is clear that negotiators have the tendency to make systematic errors when they process information.4 These errors that tend to impede negotiation performance include:
1. Irrational escalation of commitment
2. Mythical fixed-pie beliefs
3. Anchoring and adjustment
4. Isssue framing and risk
5. Availability of information
6. The winner’s curse
7. Overconfidence
8. The laws of small numbers
9. Self-serving biases
10. Endowment effect
11. Ignoring other’s cognitions
12. Reactive devaluation
MANAGING MISPERCEPTIONS AND COGNITIVE BIASES IN NEGOTIATION
Misrepresentations and cognitive biases typically arise out of conscious awareness as negotiators gather and process information. The question of how best to manage perception and cognitive bias is a difficult one. However, the following solutions to these systematic distortions can be observed:
Awareness of the occurrences
Problem definition and problem evaluation
Careful discussion of the issue and preferences of both negotiators
Negotiators awareness of the negative aspects of these distortions
Discuss these problems in structured manner within team and with their counterparts.
Endnotes
1. Babcock, Wang, and Lowenstein, 1996;de Deru and van Lange, 1995; and Thompson, 1995;Thompson and Hastie, 1990a.
2. Bateson, 1972; Goffman, 1974.
3. Roth and Sheppard, 1995, p. 94.
4. Bazerman, 1998; Neale and Bazerman, 1992b.

BEST PRACTICES IN NEGOTIATION



BEST PRACTICES IN NEGOTIATIONS
Best practices in negotiation can simply be regarded as the most usual and expected way of negotiation particularly in an organization or situations. While some people may look like born negotiators, negotiation is fundamentally a skill involving analysis and communication that everyone can learn. However, we will reflect on the broad level ten (10) best practices that negotiators can rely on;
1. Be prepared
2. Diagonose the fundamental structure of the negotiation
3. Identify and work the BANTA
4. Be willing to walk away
5. Master paradoxes
6. Remember the intangibles
7. Actively manage coalitions
8. Savour and protect your reputation
9. Remember that rationality and fairness are relative
10. Continue to learn from the experience
In conclusion, the above point should not be seen as all in all concerning best practices in negotiation, however, a wise negotiator will continue to learn and sharpen his skills in order to cope with emerging challenges.
Endnote;
Roy J. Lewiicki, .Bruce Barry, David M.Sauders; essentials of negotiation (fourth edition)

INTERNATIONAL AND CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION



INTERNATIONAL AND CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION
For many people and organization, international negotiation has become a norm rather than an exotic activity that only occasionally occurs. In the last 20 years, the frequency of international negotiation has increased rapidly bolstering the interests in international communication. However, there has been numerous inputs, from both academic and practitioner perspectives about the complexities of negotiation across borders, be it with a person from different country, culture, or region. Although the term culture has many possible definitions, we will use it to refer to the shared values and beliefs of a group of people. Country can have more than one culture, and culture can span national borders. As we have examined earlier, negotiation is a social process that is embedded in a much lager context. This context increases in complexity when more than one culture or country is involved, making international negotiation a highly complicated process.1
Phatak and Habib suggest that two overall contexts have an influence on international negotiations:
THE ENVIRONMENT CONTEXTS:
Salacuse identified six factors in the environmental context that make international negotiations more challenging than domestic negotiations: and these include the following;
Political and legal pluralism.
International economics.
Foreign government and bureaucracies.
Instability.
Ideology.
Culture.2
Phatak and Habib have suggested additional factor which is:
External stakeholders.3
IMMEDIATE COTEXTS:
At many points in our discussions, we have discussed aspects of negotiation that relate to immediate contexts factors, but without considering their international implications, at this junction we will list the concepts from the Phatak and Habib model of international negotiation. And the immediate contexts are:
Relative bargaining power.
Level of conflict.
Relationship between negotiators.
Desire outcomes.
Immediate stakeholders.
CONCEPTUALIZING CULTURE AND NEGOTIATION.
The most frequently studied aspect of international negotiation is culture and the amount of research on the effects of culture n negotiation has increased substantially in the last 20 years.4 There are many different meanings of the concept of culture, but all definition share two aspects.5 First, culture is a group-level phenomenon. That means that a defined group of people shares beliefs, values, and behavioural expectations. The second common element of culture is that cultural beliefs, values, and behavioural expectations are learned and passed on to new members of the group.
It is also important to remember that negotiation outcomes, both domestically and internationally, are determined by several different factors. While cultural differences are clearly important, negotiators must guard against assigning too much responsibility to cultural factors.6 Dialdin, Brett, Okumura, and Lytle have labelled the tendency to overlook the importance of the situational factors in favour of cultural explanations the cultural attribution error.7 It is important to recognize that even though culture describes group-level characteristics, it doesn’t mean that every member of a culture will share those characteristics equally.8 In fact, there is likely to be a wide of a variety of behavioural differences within cultures as there is between cultures.9 Although knowledge of the other party’s culture may provide an initial clue about what to expect at the bargaining table, negotiators need to be open to adjusting their view very quickly as new information is gathered.10
The two important ways that culture has been conceptualized are:
Culture as shared value
And, culture as dialectic.11
THE INFLUENCE OF CULTURE ON NEGOTIATION:
Managerial perspectives
Cultural differences have been suggested to influence negotiation in several ways. Now let’s examine 10 different ways that culture can influence negotiation.12
Definition of negotiation: the fundamental definition of negotiation, what is negotiable, and what occurs when we negotiate can differ greatly across cultures.13 (i.e.) American way and the Japanese ways of viewing negotiations.
Negotiation opportunity: culture influences the way negotiators perceive an opportunity as distributive versus integrative. Negotiators in North America are predisposed to perceive negotiation as being fundamentally distributive. 14 But this is not the case outside North America.
Selection of negotiators: The criterion used to select who will participate in a negotiation is different across cultures. These criteria can include such subject matter as age, seniority, gender, status, etc.
Protocol: cultures differ in the degree to which protocol, or the formality of the relations between the two negotiating parties, is important.
Communication: cultures influence how people communicate; both verbally and nonverbally. There are also differences in body language across cultures.
Time sensitivity: cultures largely determine what time means and how it affects negotiations.15 For example, comparing North American time consciousness with that of China or Latin Americans.
Risk propensity: Cultures vary in the extent to which they are willing to take risks. Some cultures tend to produce bureaucratic, conservative decision makers who want a great deal of information before making decisions.
Groups versus individuals: cultures differ according to whether they emphasize the individual or the group.eg the United State is very much an individual-oriented culture.
Nature of agreements: culture also has an important effect both on concluding agreements and on what form the negotiated agreement takes.
Emotionalism: culture appears to influence the extent to which negotiators display emotions. 16 These emotions may be use as tactics, or may be a natural response to positive and negative circumstances during negotiation.17
THEN INFLUENCE OF CULTURE ON NEGOTIATION:
Research perspectives
A conceptual model of where culture may influence negotiation has been developed by different scholars, for example Jeanne Brett, suggested that culture will influence, setting of priorities, and strategies, the identification of the potential for integrative agreement, and the pattern of interaction between negotiators. Researchers also explore how intracultural and cross cultural factors will influence the outcome of an agreement. It has also been suggested that overall negotiation process and outcome will be influenced by cultures
CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE NEGOTIATING STRATEGIES
Stephen Weiss has proposed a useful way of thinking about the options we have when negotiating with someone from another culture.18 Weiss observes that negotiators may choose from among up to eight different culturally responsive strategies. These strategies may be used individually or sequentially, and the strategies can be switched as the negotiation progresses. Weiss’s culturally responsive strategies can be arranged into three groups, based on the level of familiarity (.low, moderate, high):
LOW FAMLIARITY:
Employ agents or advisers (unilateral strategy)
Bring in a mediator (joint strategy)
Induce the other negotiator to use your approach (joint strategy)

MODERATE FAMILIARITY:
Adapt to the other negotiator’s approach (unilateral strategy)
Coordinate adjustment (joint strategy)
HIGH FAMILIARITY:
Embrace the other negotiator’s approach (unilateral strategy)
Improvise an approach (joint strategy)
Effect symphony (joint strategy)
Lastly, there has been considerate research on the effects of culture on negotiation in the last decade. Findings suggest that culture has important effects on several aspects of negotiations, including planning, the negotiation process, information exchange, negotiation cognition, and negotiator perception of ethical behaviour.
Endnotes
1. Sebenius, 2002a.
2. Salacuse, 1988.
3. Phatak and Habib, 1996.
4. Brett, 2001, and Gelfand and Dyer, 2002.
5. See Avruch, 2000.
6. Rubin and Sanders, 1991; Sebenius, 2002b; Weiss, 2003.
7. Dialdin, Kopelman, Adair, Brett, Okumura, and Lytle, 1999.
8. Avruch, 2000; Sebenius, 2002b.
9. Rubin and Sander, 1991.
10. Adlar, 2002.
11. Janosik, 1987.
12. Foster, 1992; Hendon and Hendon, 1990; Moran and Stripp, 1991; Salacuse, 1998.
13. See Ohanya, 1999; Yook and Albert, 1998.
14. Thompson, 1990.
15. See Mayfield, Mayfield, Martin, and Herbig, 1997.
16. Salacuse, 1998.
17. See Kumar, 2004.

Sunday, September 20, 2009

MULTIPLE PARTIES AND TEAMS



MULTIPLE PARTIES AND TEAMS
Multiple parties and teams negotiations can be defined as a situation where we have more than two parties working together to achieve collective goals or objectives. In this paper, we will highlights the nature of multiple parties and also show the dynamics changes that occur when group, teams, and task forces have to present individual views and come to a collective agreement about a problem, plan or future course of action.
THE NATURE OF MULTIPARTY NEGOTIATIONS
More than two parties.
Information and computational complexity.
Procedural complexity.
Strategic complexity.
Diverse opinion and preferences.
Collective decision making.
Conflict of interests.
Deliberations.
Susceptible to breakdown.
Conscious commitment.
Multiparty negotiation looks a lot like group decision making because it involves a group of parties trying to reach common solution in a situation where the parties’ preferences may diverge consequently, understanding multiparty negotiation means, in part, understanding the attributes of an effective group. The effective groups and their members do the following things:
Test assumptions and inferences.
Share all relevant information.
Focus on interests, not positions.
Be specific—use examples.
Agree on what important words mean.
Explain the reasons behind one’s statements, questions, and answer.
Disagree openly with any member of the group.
Make statements, and then invite questions and answer.
Jointly design ways to test disagreements and solutions.
Discuss undiscussable issues.
Keep the discussion focused.
Do not take cheap shots or otherwise distract the group.
Expect to have all members participate in all phases of the process.
Exchange relevant information with nongroup members.
Make decisions by consensus.
Conduct a self-critique.
MANAGING MULTIPARTY NEGOTIATIONS
Given the additional complexity that occurs in a multiparty negotiation, the most effective way to cope is to focus on the three key stages that characterized multiparty negotiations. The three key stages are:
PRENEGOTIATION STAGE:
Actual negotiation
And, managing agreement.
The prenegotiation stage: this stage is characterized by lots of informal contact among the parties. They tend to work on the following issues:
The participants
Coalitions
Defining group member roles
Understanding the costs and consequences of no agreement
Learning the issues and constructing agenda
Abide by a set of ground rules
THE FORMAL NEGOTIATION STAGE:
Appoint an appropriate chair
Use and restructure the agenda
Ensure a diversity of information and perspectives
Ensure consideration of all the available information
Manage conflict effectively
Review and manage the decision rules
Strive for a first agreement
Manage problem team members
MANAGING THE AGREEMENT:
Select the best solution
Develop an action plan
Implement the action
Evaluate the just-completed process
Most negotiation theory has been developed under the assumption that negotiation is a bilateral process—that there are only two focal negotiators or teams of negotiators opposing each other. Yet many negotiations are multilateral or group deliberations—more than two negotiators are involved, each with his or her own interests and positions, and the group must arrive at a collective agreement regarding a plan, decision, or course of action. From the above, we have been able to explore the dynamics of multiparty negotiation, the complex negotiation process, and the critical decision making process.
Endnote
Roy J. Lewicki, Bruce Barry, David M.Saunders: essential of negotiation (fourth edition)

Thursday, September 17, 2009

RELATIONSHIP IN NEGOTIATION



RELATIONSHIPS IN NEGOTIATION
Up to this point, we have described the negotiation process as though it occurred between two parties who had no prior relationship or knowledge of each other, came together to do deal, and had no relationship once the deal was done. This is clearly not the way many actual negotiations unfold. Negotiations occur in a rich and complex social context that has a significant impact on how the process evolves. One major way that context affects negotiation is that people are in relationships that have a past, a present, and future.However, our focus will be on the ways these past and the future relationships impact present negotiations.furthermore, we know that negotiation is a discussion intended to produce an agreement relationship is “the meaning assigned by two or more individuals to their connectedness or coexistence.
KEY ELEMENTS IN MANAGING NEGOTIATIONS WITHIN RELATIONSHIPS
Reputation, trust, and justice are the three elements that become more critical and pronounced when they occur within a relationship negotiation.Thus, we will discuss how the effects of these elements become intensified in negotiations within relationships.
REPUTATION:
Your reputation is how other people remember their past experience with you. Reputation is the legacy that negotiators leave behind after a negotiation encounter with another party.” A reputation is a perpetual identity, reflective of the combination of salient personal characteristics and accomplishments, demonstrated behaviour and intended images preserved over time, as observed directly and/or as reported from secondary source.
TRUST:
Many of the scholars who have written about relationships have identified trust as central to any relationship. Daniel McAllister defined the word trust as an individual’s belief in and willingness to act on the words, actions and decisions of another.1 There are three things that contribute to the level of trust one negotiator may have for another: the individual’s chronic disposition toward trust (i.e. individual differences in personality that make some people more trusting than others); situation factors (e.g., the opportunity for the parties to communicate with each other adequately); and the history of the relationship between the parties.
JUSTICE:
The third major issue in relationship is the question of what is fair or just.Again, justice has been a major issue in the organizational sciences; individuals in organizations often debate whether their pay is fair, whether they are being fairly treated, or whether the organization might be maltreating some group of people. Justice can take several forms: and these include,
Distributive justice.
Procedural justice.
Interactional justice.
Finally, systemic justice.
RELATIONSHIPS AMONG REPUTATION, TRUST, AND JUSTICE
Not only are various forms of justice interrelated, but reputation, trust, and justice all interact in shaping expectations of the other’s behaviour. For example, when one party feels the other has acted fairly in the past or will act fairly in the future, he or she is more likely to trust the other. We would also predict that acting fairly leads to being trusted and also enhances a positive reputation. Conversely, when parties are unfairly treated, they often become angry and retaliate against either the injustice itself or those who are seen as having caused it. Unfair treatment is likely to lead to distrust and a bad reputation.6 trust, justice, and reputation are all central to relationship negotiations and feed each other; we cannot understand negotiation within complex relationships without prominently considering how we judge the other (and ourselves) on these dimensions.
Endnote
1. Daniel McAllister.1998.
2. Roy J.Lewicki, .Bruce Barry, David M.Saunders, .Essentials of Negotiation