Organization Behavior Case Study Review Analysis: Agenda For HPS Negotiation Case Study Organization Behavior Case

Study Review Sample Analysis Introduction of the case Presented case is related with the negotiation process undertaken by buyer of HPS regarding availing organizational change services from different service providers. In this context, there are two parties namely Thomasen and Fox and Standwall (FS) have presented their own tenders having different specifications. In this context, both the service providers have provided their service tender over four different aspects, namely Cost, Insurance, Starting date of the project, and Key personnel employed within the project. Agenda for negotiation with each of these service providers In order to have proper and effective negotiation with different parties, there is a specific agenda is taken into account. Primary agenda for negotiation with each of the parties will be the cost of the project, in this concern, the cost quoted by both the parties will be taken into account as the primary factor, while making any decision related with the adoption of the offer. As per this agenda, the company will provide an upper edge to the party who has quoted low cost for the entire project. Along with this primary agenda, there are a number of different aspects of the offer presented by each of the party will be examined as secondary agenda for the negotiation process. These important factors are Insurance services provided by the service provider, starting data of the project as mentioned by the service provider in his tender, and experience and skills of different personnel employed by the service provider for accomplishing the project. These all the factor will be discussed before undertaking any decision. As per the agenda considered in this research process, different type of strategies related with such important factors will be taken into account. For instance, in the context of insurance service, service provider who is providing more risk cover for the project will be selected. Further, service provider who has mentioned lesser lead time in the project will be preferred. In addition to this, the service provider who has mentioned to employ highly skilled and experienced consultants for the project will be selected on priority.

As per this selected agenda for each the service provider, different tender offers and their specifications will be reviewed. In this review, the specification of the tenders are aligned with different mentioned criteria to select the most beneficial and efficient tender offer. Style adopted by the negotiator in this negotiation

Outcome and success of a negotiation process heavily depends upon the negotiation styles adopted by different parties involved within the process. There are a number of different negotiation styles which can be undertaken by the negotiator for the purpose of negotiating with the counter party. Selection of the most appropriate negotiation style for the project depends upon the nature of the project and desired outcomes. Effective and appropriate negation style helps the negotiators perform in the most effective manner during the process of negotiation and achieve the desired goals from the negotiation. In the context of the presented case, I would like to adopt an integrative negotiation style. This negotiation style implies the negotiator to distribute benefits of the entire negotiation process among all the parties involved within the negotiation process so that a win-win situation of negotiation can be achieved. This negotiation style is a non-conventional style of negotiation, in which the negotiator adopts a positive attitude towards the counter parties and settles the negotiation process at the point where he can attain benefits of the negotiation without snatching the interest of the other parties involved within the negotiation process (Budjac 2007). In the presented case, the implication of integrative negotiation style would be the most suitable and justifiable negotiating style. It is due to the reason that in the case, both the negotiating parties i.e. Owner of the principal organization HPS, who wants to avail services, and two different service providers, are quite dependent on each other. The positive relationship between both the parties of negotiation process is quite essential for the long term sustainability a well as successful completion of the entire project. In integrative negotiation style used within this case, the negotiator would negotiate with the counter party for the purpose of availing effective and efficient organizational change services the lowest cost. For this purpose, there are a number of different criteria are selected on which, the viability of the offer will be judged. However, in the process of availing best services at the lowest cost, the interest of the counter party would also be taken into consideration prominently. In this concern, some positive and lucrative offers related with timely payment, and better working conditions would also be provided to the services provider (Dhungel 2011). Adoption of this negotiation style within the negotiation process would be proved quite helpful for the organization in maintaining good and long term relationship with the selected service provider. This would allow the organization to avail better organizational change services for a long run (Daft, and Marcic 2012). Skills necessary for the negotiator in the presented case Success and viability of a negotiation process is directly co-related with the skills and competencies of the person involved within the process of negotiation. As integrative negotiation style is recommended for the case, it is quite essential for the negotiator to possess some specific skills and competencies. Some specific skills of the negotiator in this case can be outlined as below:

(1) Proper understanding of the objective: the negotiator should have adequate information regarding needs and requirements of the organization in existing period of. Proper understanding and Knowledge about the objective of the negotiation will be proved quite helpful for the negotiators to make better selection among all the available resources. (2) Analytical skills: for a negotiator it is quite essential to possess some intensive skills for analyzing the available option. As in the presented case, there are two different service providers, namely Thomasen, and Fox and Standwall (FS) are available, the negotiator need to make comparison between services provided by the both the parties and analysis the most fruitful option for the organization (Plantey 2007). (3) Avoiding of personal biasness: Personal biasness of the negotiators makes the negotiation more complex and less worthy for both the parties included in the process. Avoidance of the personal biasness within the negotiation process is the major skill possess by the negotiator as it enables the negotiator to undertake a fair and effective negotiation. (4) Patience: The negotiator must possess some intensive amount of patience and power of not over reacting on controversial issues arisen within the negotiation process. As there can be a number of different situations in which controversies and conflicts can be evolved, it becomes quite essential for the negotiator to address the issue quite calmly (Luecke, and Patterson 2008). (5) Quick thinking: The negotiator must possess quick thinking and decision making capabilities, which enables him to analyze existing conditions and undertake effective decisions without wasting any time. This skill helps negotiators to avail advantages of opportunities. (6) Open minded approach: This skill of the negotiator allows him to analyze different alternatives available to him with open mind and positive perception. Preconception regarding a specific alternative can lead to harm the comprehensiveness of the outcomes of the negation process (Daft, and Marcic 2012). (7) Tactful approach: The approach of the negotiator should be quite tactful and tricky which can allow him to resolve different complex situations and issues that can hamper the negotiation quite adversely (Luecke, and Patterson 2008). These skills allow the negotiator not only to avoid common problems in a negotiation process but it also helps them to have positive position in the negotiation.