In This Module You Saw The Impact And Issues Related To Emot

In This Module You Saw The Impact And Issues Related To Emotions Bias

In this module you saw the impact and issues related to emotions, biases, and perceptions surrounding a negotiation. You already devised a plan for Michelle so that she could be prepared for her negotiation with her boss. Clearly, Michelle is upset over having to switch shifts and consequently locate new or additional daycare. At this point in the conflict, Nikki is aware of Michelle being displeased with the shift change and knows that she wants to meet, but is unaware of reasons behind it. Michelle devised the new schedule based solely on seniority and nothing else. She thought that this was the fairest way possible given that the policy change affected everyone's schedule. She does not want the situation with Michelle to snowball into a bigger issue with overall dissatisfaction with the employees. Nikki feels that there is a section of employees who should not receive the preferential shifts because they are continuous problems in the workplace (this is a true and documented statement) regardless of the fact that they have worked at the call center longer. you will be identifying possible emotions, biases, and perceptions for this dilemma. Address the following: Frame the issues from Michelle and Nikki's perspectives (use an interest, rights, or power approach to framing the issues). Biases hamper the negotiation process when parties come to the table with prejudgments about the other party. Put yourself into the shoes of both parties. Evaluate the biases that each party might have formed about the other party. Think about some of your workplace conflicts, what are some of the typical biases that arise when there is a dispute between a supervisor and a subordinate? Relate these biases to Michelle and Nikki's situation. Nikki knows that emotions are running high in the conflict with Michelle. From your readings this week and outside research, create a list of seven strategies that Nikki can use during her negotiation with Michelle for dealing with an opponent whose negative emotions are running high and explain how each tactic can be utilized in this situation. Ignoring the emotions is not an option.

Paper For Above instruction

The conflict between Michelle and Nikki exemplifies how emotions, biases, and perceptions can complicate workplace negotiations. Both parties possess distinct perspectives shaped by their interests, experiences, and biases, which influence their approach to resolving the issue. Framing the issues from each person's standpoint provides clarity on their underlying motivations and conflicts.

From Michelle's perspective, the core issue revolves around fairness and equity in scheduling. Michelle perceives the shift change as a direct result of seniority, which she believes is a fair and objective criterion. Her interest lies in maintaining a sense of justice and ensuring that her concerns—specifically, her need to find appropriate childcare—are acknowledged. Michel's rights-based framing would emphasize her entitlement to fair treatment based on her seniority, and she may see her right to a predictable schedule as integral to her well-being. Alternatively, her power perspective might focus on her seniority as her primary leverage in negotiations, expecting her to be prioritized in shift scheduling due to her length of service.

Conversely, Nikki’s perspective is rooted in operational fairness and workplace harmony. She perceives that certain employees have demonstrated disruptive behaviors, making them ineligible for preferential shifts despite their long tenure. Her interest centers on fairness based on performance and conduct, ensuring the work environment remains productive. From her rights-based frame, Nikki might argue that workplace rules and behavior standards justify her decisions and that fairness entails evaluating employees' conduct. Her power approach involves her managerial authority to determine scheduling based on a combination of seniority and work performance, emphasizing her role in maintaining order.

Biases significantly influence how each party views the other. Michelle might harbor biases that Nikki favors management interests over employee fairness, viewing her as unsympathetic to individual employee circumstances. She could also perceive Nikki as dismissive of her concerns or as arbitrarily enforcing policies. Nikki, on the other hand, may view Michelle as resistant to managerial authority or as entitled, fostering biases rooted in her concern for workplace discipline and productivity. Both might also unconsciously attribute negative motives—Michelle might think Nikki is punitive, whereas Nikki might see Michelle as resistant to organizational rules.

Workplace conflicts such as these often involve biases like the tendency to stereotype—seeing the other as solely motivated by self-interest or misaligned values. Subordinate employees may perceive supervisors as unfair or rigid, while managers might view employees as uncooperative or entitled. In this context, Michelle might see herself as a victim of unfair treatment, while Nikki perceives Michelle’s dissatisfaction as a challenge to organizational authority. These biases can distort communication and hinder mutual understanding.

Given the heightened emotions in this controversy, Nikki must approach the negotiation with strategies tailored to manage and de-escalate negative feelings. Drawing from research and best practices, the following seven strategies are essential:

1. Active Listening: Nikki should practice attentive listening, demonstrating genuine interest in Michelle’s concerns. This can be done through paraphrasing Michelle's statements to confirm understanding, helping Michelle feel heard and validated, thereby reducing defensiveness.
2. Empathy Expression: Expressing empathy allows Nikki to acknowledge Michelle’s feelings, such as her stress about childcare, which helps de-escalate emotional tension and fosters trust.
3. Body Language Control: Maintain open, non-threatening body language to create a calm atmosphere. This includes eye contact, relaxed posture, and appropriate gestures that signal receptivity.
4. Emotional Validation: Recognize and validate Michelle’s feelings without immediately trying to fix the problem. Validating emotions helps diffuse negative feelings and builds rapport.
5. Effective Questioning: Use open-ended questions to encourage Michelle to express her concerns and underlying interests, aiding in understanding her perspective beyond the surface issue.
6. Reframing Statements: Reframe negative statements into positive or neutral language to redirect the conversation constructively, such as focusing on shared goals like maintaining team harmony.
7. Maintaining Calm Demeanor: Nikki should remain calm and composed, even if Michelle becomes emotional. This modeling can influence Michelle to regulate her emotions and promote a more productive discussion.

By applying these strategies, Nikki can effectively manage high emotions, foster mutual respect, and facilitate a constructive negotiation. These tactics prevent the escalation of negative feelings and build a platform for collaborative problem-solving, ultimately leading to a resolution beneficial to both parties.

References

• Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin Books.
• Mnookin, R. H., Peppet, S. R., & Kielmann, K. M. (2000). Beyond winning: Negotiating to create value in conflicts. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 5, 1-84.
• Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2015). Negotiation. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Thompson, L. (2015). The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator. Pearson.
• Shell, G. R. (2006). Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People. Penguin.
• Kerfoot, D. (2016). Managing emotions in negotiations. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/09/managing-emotions-in-negotiations
• Ury, W. (1991). Getting Past No: Negotiating in Difficult Situations. Bantam Books.
• Carnevale, P. J., & Pruitt, D. G. (1992). Negotiation in social conflict. Open University Press.
• De Dreu, C. K., & Carnevale, P. J. (2003). Motivational biases in conflict resolution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 852–873.
• MacDuffie, J. P. (2004). Breaking the code of change: A look at negotiation in managing workplace conflict. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2004/11/breaking-the-code-of-change