1. MGT5650 Discussion Question #2: should be approximately 250-300 words

 

1. MGT5650 Discussion Question #2: should be approximately 250-300 words in length.

Different Drums and Different Drummers: “Please Understand Me”

by David Keirsey & Marilyn Bates

“If I do not want what you want, please try not to tell me that my want is wrong. Or if I believe other than you, at least pause before you correct my view. Or if my emotion is less than yours, or more, given the same circumstances, try not to ask me to feel more strongly or weakly. Or yet if I act, or fail to act, in the manner of your design for action, let me be. I do not, for the moment at least, ask you to understand me. That will come only when you are willing to give up changing me into a copy of you. I may be your spouse, your parent, your offspring, your friend, or your colleague. If you will allow me any of my own wants, or emotions, or beliefs, or actions, then you open yourself, so that some day these ways of mine might not seem so wrong, and might finally appear to you as right — for me. Not that you embrace my ways as right for you, but that you are no longer irritated or disappointed with me for my seeming waywardness. And in understanding me you might come to prize my differences from you, and, far from seeking to change me, preserve and even nurture those differences.”

Why is personality type an important Contemporary Management Issue?

2. MGT 5650 Discussion Question #3 : should be 250 – 300 words in length

COVID 19 has created a great deal of stress in the workplace for many of us.  Why is stress in the workplace something we should be concerned about?  Can you provide an example of workplace stress or bullying and offer a solution to the problem.  

—————————————————————

3. Complete all 4 discussion questions and reply to 4 people: 

DQs:

-Based on what you have read in the text, as a negotiator, how would you go about changing your reputation from negative to positive?

-If you were a negotiator, how would you manage identification-based distrust between you and the other party? Be specific in your response.

-Explain a professional situation in which you went about building trust. What steps did you take in this process?

-What is your idea of a coalition? Provide a hypothetical situation in which you would identify the need for a coalition.

REPLIES:

DQ 2 reply: Week 5 Discussion by Lucas Gardona – Saturday, 15 January 2022, 1:08 PM 

The highest level of trust is achieved when there is an emotional connection between the parties. It allows one party to act as an agent for the other and substitute for that person in interpersonal transactions. This is called identification based trust. Trust exists because the parties understand each other’s intentions and appreciate the other’s wants and desires. This mutual understanding is developing to the point that can effectively act for the others. Controls are minimal at this level as you don’t need to monitor the other party because there exist unquestioned loyalty. 

The best example of identification based trust is among the happily married couple. A husband comes to learn what’s important to his wife and anticipate those actions. She, in turn, trust that he will anticipate what’s important to each other without having to ask. Increased identification enables each to think like the other, feel like the other and respond like the others.

Broken promises have led to a breakdown in what was at one time, a bond if unquestioned loyalty. It’s likely to have been replaced with knowledge based trust

DQ 3 reply by Lucas Gardona – Saturday, 15 January 2022, 1:09 PM 

The single person principal is self explanatory. One person makes all the decisions.

Principals which consist of a committee refers to a group of people who are appointed, or nominated to make the decisions on behalf of the company or organization they represent. A committee could be comprised of a variable mix of individuals. For example, a committee could consist of a board; a mixture of management personnel; or any other collection of individuals.

Why is this important to know? Because, by knowing who’s sitting at the negotiation table, this information allows us to clarify our counterpart’s level of authority in making decisions. If our counterpart has only limited authority, or has to defer all decisions or proposals to a higher authority, we are then able to clearly visualize how decisions will be made. This also allows us to uncover the identities of all the actual decision making principals.

Negotiations can be complex. Thorny issues might result in a bitter deadlock. Rather than make a mountain out of a molehill, the solution might be as simple as having the right people sit at the table.

This information can be crucial before you even begin your talks. If the right people aren’t sitting at the table, then the whole negotiation might become unnecessarily derailed before you even start.

Agents are people who represent the interests of the principal decision makers. They act on the principal’s behalf with varying degrees of authority. Negotiation Agents are employed in negotiations specifically because of their expertise, specialised knowledge, and experience.

There are two types of agents who represent principal parties and their interests. The first type is the independent representative. Some examples would include a an agent or a broker who negotiates the buying and selling of goods and services on behalf of another party. The second type of agent is a non independent representative. This type of agent works directly for a company or oganization. An example would be a company’s purchasing department whose staff negotiates the lease or acquisition of supplies or equipment. Another example would be a union representative acting on behalf of a union.

The agent’s know-how is clearly the most constructive reason why they are employed by decision makers to best represent their interests. The other side of the coin reveals that agents may have other self-serving interests of their own. These contrary interests might be in conflict with the the aims of the people who engage their services. Let’s unravel this tangle. so that we are aware of potential contrary interests that agents might bring to the table.

DQ 5 reply by Lucas Gardona – Saturday, 15 January 2022, 1:10 PM 

The definition of coalition is: a combination or alliance, especially a temporary one between persons, factions, states, etc. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has dramatically undermined stability in Iraq, Syria and the broader Middle East and poses a threat to international peace and security. ISIS continues to commit gross, systematic abuses of human rights and violations of international law, including indiscriminate killing and deliberate targeting of civilians, mass executions and extrajudicial killings, persecution of individuals and entire communities on the basis of their identity, kidnapping of civilians, forced displacement of Shia communities and minority groups, killing and maiming of children, rape and other forms of sexual violence, along with numerous other atrocities. ISIS presents a global terrorist threat which has recruited thousands of foreign fighters to Iraq and Syria from across the globe and leveraged technology to spread its violent extremist ideology and to incite terrorist acts. As noted in UN Security Council Resolution 2170, “terrorism can only be defeated by a sustained and comprehensive approach involving the active participation and collaboration of all States… which is why our first priority is to encourage others to join in this important endeavor.”

The U.S. emphasizes that there is a role for every country to play in degrading and defeating ISIS. Some partners are contributing to the military effort, by providing arms, equipment, training, or advice. These partners include countries in Europe and in the Middle East region that are contributing to the air campaign against ISIS targets. International contributions, however, are not solely or even primarily military contributions. The effort to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIS will require reinforcing multiple lines of effort, including preventing the flow of funds and fighters to ISIS, and exposing its true nature.

DQ1 reply by Loris Mazzetto – Sunday, 16 January 2022, 5:55 PM

Different situations, environments, emotional states, etc., may shape how an individual conducts a negotiation. Errors, needs, or behaviors can create a negative reputation. This perceptual identity is inevitably protracted over time as a legacy for the individual. Since reputation is developed over time, it is difficult to change, as the process of changing reputation perception on others is complex and, possibly, long. The actual outcome of a negotiation may be shaped by the expectations set by others on a specific negotiator based on previous experiences.

To change the reputation perceived by others, a negotiator with a negative reputation has to actively defend, be defended, and be renewed in others’ eyes. The personal ability to apologize and justify past events can substantially affect how the negotiator and the related experience are remembered by another party.

For example, to gain a positive perspective when presented with a lower reputation, I would start by getting information about the other party. At this point, I would slowly start my reputation regaining by trying to meet the counterpart. When the situation permits, I will focus on commonalities to please the psychological side of the negotiator to increase the chances for a groundwork of trust. When sitting at the negotiation table, grounds can be set clearly from the beginning, showing collaboration and willingness to reach expectations on both sides. Honestly and proof of it can be a pivotal point in establishing a person’s credibility. My goal would be to concentrate on the development of credibility and slowly shift toward a better reputation, proving my good faith and trustworthiness along with situations that can prove them during the negotiation process. I would listen and analyze the counterpart during the entire process, especially the emotional side.

Loris.

Source:

Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., Saunders, D. M. (2020). Negotiation. (8th ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Get 20% Discount: Coupon code [ SAVE20 ]