The paper “ Decision Analytic Method - a Suitable Approach Resolving a Conflict between Two Parties” is a persuasive example of the case study on communication. The report focuses on the use of decision-analytic approach to negotiation to find out how the approach can be used in the context of the conflict between UK Airways and its cabin crew. Some of the major problems that the UK Airways is facing are disputes due to the change in working practices in the airlines. These changes are mostly due to the reduction in number of staff on long and short-haul flights.
There are various other concerns as well that both the employees and the management are facing. Some of them include overtime payment, shift duties, cuts in training budget, expenses and allowances. In this report, the researcher has applied the decision-analytic approach to negotiation to address these issues and find out possible solutions during the negotiation process between the management and the cabin crew. The report would provide an in-depth analysis of the decision-analytic approach and how to apply it in the present scenario. Further, the report would also focus on various pitfalls or barriers that might hamper the negotiation process and suggest means to overcome these barriers.
The report would conclude with a set of recommendations that the management might implement in order to make the negotiation process with the employee's success. Decision-analytic approachIn case of conflicts, everyone looks towards solving the issue in an amicable manner. Negotiations play a pivotal role in such cases. However, to become undertake an effective negotiation process might not be easy as it requires taking and eliminating various decisions at the negotiation table.
In case the negotiation goes wrong due to an incorrect decision, the entire deal might be called off. Therefore, decision making in a negotiation is very important and it is also imperative to analyse each decision before the final one is taken (Barsade & Gibson 2007).
Babcock, L. and Loewenstein, G. 1997, ‘Explaining bargaining impasse: The role of self-serving biases’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(1), 109-126.
Barsade, S. and Gibson, D. 2007, ‘Why does affect matter in organizations?’ Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(1), 36-59.
Coleman, P. T. and Lim, Y. Y. J. 2001, ‘A systematic approach to evaluating the effects of collaborative negotiation training on individuals and groups’, Negotiation Journal 17, 363–392.
Forgas, J.P. and George, J. M. 2001, ‘Affective influences on judgments and behavior in organizations: An information processing perspective’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86, 3-34.
Lerner, J. S., Small, D., and Loewenstein, G. 2004, ‘Heart strings and purse strings: Carryover effects of emotions on economic transactions’, Psychological Science 15(5), 337-341.
Payne, J. W., Samper, A., Bettman, J. R., and Luce, M. F. 2008, ‘Boundary conditions on unconscious thought in decision making’, Psychological Science 19(11), 1118-1123.
Radzevick, J. R. and Moore, D. A. 2008, ‘Myopic biases in competitions,’ Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 107, 206-218.
Raiffa, Howard 1982, The Art and Science of Negotiation, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.
Stanovich, K. E. and West, R. F. 2000, ‘Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23(5), 645-665.
Tenbrunsel, A. E., Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Moag, J., and Bazerman, M. H. 1999, ‘The negotiation matching process: Relationships and partner selection’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 80(3), 252-284.
Thompson, L. L. 2005, ‘The mind and heart of the negotiator (3rd ed.)’, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.