Interest Based Bargaining Process and Purpose

The collective bargaining process is hardly ever dull or unexciting. Every now and then, there is significant tension as one of the participating parties or the other comes to the realization that it will fail to reach the expectations of its constituents. From time to time, there is significant eagerness and passion as resourceful options emanate with the potential to render mutual gains. In different occasions, apparently negligible or routine issues of contract terminology or working state of affairs have the potential to be fiery and tense on the basis of how they are addressed (Kochan and Lipsky, 2003). Interest based bargaining is founded on the ascertainment and determination of mutual interests instead of the resolution of specific bargaining demands. Interest based bargaining can be delineated as a process of solving problems that is conducted in a moral manner that generates efficacious solutions and at the same time enhancing the bargaining relationship.

Also referred to as integrative bargaining, this is a negotiation approach in which parties work in tandem to obtain a win-win solution to their disagreement or difference of opinion. This strategy lays emphasis on the development of mutually benefits settlements on the basis of the interests of those in dispute. These interests consist of the necessities, requests, worries, and uncertainties significant to every party. They are the fundamental reasons why individuals become involved in conflict. Interest-based takes into account the potential for the parties’ interests to be amalgamated in manners that generate mutual value or increase the win. The potential for integration solely subsists when there are manifold issues involved in the negotiation. This is for the reason that the parties have to have the capacity to make concessions across issues for both of the sides to be gratified with the final outcome (Sprangler, 2003).

The main emphasis of this particular bargaining strategy is to realize mutual bargaining interests with the main purpose of articulating choices and solutions for mutual achievement and gain. In this strategy, instead of making use of proposals as well as counter proposal was methods of reaching agreements, the participants in the bargaining process utilize active listening, brainstorming, process checking, unanimity decision making, as well as matrix building to facilitate and simplify the settling of issues. A fundamental purpose or objective of interest based bargaining is to generate a relationship or affiliation for the future on the basis of dependence, understanding, and mutual respect (Snell et al., 2015).

There are four key processes that are encompassed in interest-based bargaining. To begin with, subsequent to attaining an agreement of their individual needs, goals, and interests, the parties attempt to comprehend the real requirements and objectives of their challengers. This is accomplished through discourse and exchange of ideas through which positions are amenably shared not influenced or concealed. A second process encompasses the parties creating a free flow of material and information by enlightening true goals, paying attention to their challengers cautiously, and accommodating a mutual solution that includes both positions. Third of all, there is the process of laying emphasis on the mutual ground between the parties and diminishing the dissimilarities. The distinct objectives of every party have to be taken into account as part of a collaborative endeavor to attain a greater objective. The last process encompasses the parties seeking and pursuing solutions that address and satisfy the goals and objectives of each of them. The results of interest based bargaining are measured by the magnitude to which the goals and objectives of each of the parties are met. In particular, if one of the party’s purposes to achieve more in comparison to the other, then the negotiation and bargaining will be challenging and will not be possible when both parties purpose to win (Kennedy, 1999).

One of the key advantages of interest-based bargaining is that both of the parties involved end up benefiting. Both of the sides end up in a win and win position. Secondly, within the labor or work setting, management is able to attain flexibility, peace amongst the workforces, increased prospects of executing challenging proposals, for instance, multiskilling and pay for performance, together with safety of labor supply. The inference of this is that management is not necessitated to create or form other facilities in the event of a work strike. Another advantage is that unions are able to attain increased employment steadiness and constancy for the membership, skills advancement, a superior say in making decisions, and augmented employability of union members (Kennedy, 1999).

There is also the advantage of easing of tensions. In particular, the interest based bargaining model is one that is responsive. The prominent negotiators function more as facilitators to the dialogue and therefore permit a set of negotiations that is more democratic. However, past the participation component, the parties are dealing with issues instead of basically defending their positions and as a result work in a more cooperative manner. Remarkably, both parties are permitted to search for what is paramount for the other party and not just for them. Another benefit of the process is that the essence of collaboration can be long-drawn-out beyond the real dialogues of the collective bargaining arrangement and the forthcoming periods (Boniface and Rashmi, 2006). As a result, issues can more often than not be addressed in the course of the life of the contract in a more accommodating manner since the parties have laid the foundation for mutual gain for the duration of the contract discussions. In this manner, complaints can be resolved that might in other circumstances have shifted to mediation in previous years. Despite the fact that this will significantly fluctuate in dissimilar settings and reliant on the kind of complaint, there is without doubt that when parties are employed to a cooperative approach, their newfangled impetus is perceiving whether they can resolve an issue devoid of legal action or conflict. Achievement is measured in a different way, not by successes and damages but by acceptable resolve of matters. Moreover, in this model, there is the ability of being able to address and resolve issues that could not be considered in previous occasions. This is beneficial for the reason that the parties are inclined to attempt a number of things for the reason that the other party is also willing (DiGiovanni et al., 2006).

Along with the entrenched and deep-rooted attitudes towards collective bargaining, there are numerous aspects that make interest-based bargaining challenging and disadvantageous. A competitive and conflict-trotted association with a minimal trust level will give rise to both parties having expectations of competitive dialogues. Notably, one party or both of them may be prejudiced in the direction of a mentality of “either-or”, which hinders the interest-based bargaining. In addition, as a result of distributive and interest-based issues will necessitate to be resolved in numerous bargaining circumstances, the distributive model will over and over again carry on dominating the negotiations (Kennedy, 1999).

Another disadvantage of interest-based bargaining is that it is time-consuming. This is for the reason that it takes a lengthy time period to prepare and be ready for the process, particularly with the gathering of data and the need for training. Moreover, the process takes a lengthy time to negotiate the problems once both parties come to the table. In the customary process of bargaining, a number of issues may never be discoursed in the least, or are solely handled by a number of interchanges back and forth. With respect to interest-based bargaining, each and every problem or issue raised is meant to obtain a comprehensive treatment that takes into account devising options, establishing benchmarks and standards by which the choices will be measured, examining and assessing every each option to perceive whether it meets the standards, and optimistically picking out and perfecting one of those options. This can take significantly drawn-out amount of time and with the exception that the partakers are prepared to put in the time, the practice will merely be impossible (DiGiovanni et al., 2006).

In interest-based bargaining, there is the shortcoming of finding it difficult to control team members. In accordance to DiGiovanni et al. (2006), the role of the key negotiator is weakened and reduced under this particular model. The negotiator simply operates as a facilitator or a mediator. Customarily, in the process of collective bargaining, the key negotiator is usually the only speaker apart from the times when he or she permits a certain party to speak. On the other hand, with respect to interest-based bargaining, all individuals participate and at certain times, this can be an issue if an individual is laying out their worries or making a point improperly or else being in contradiction of the interests of his party or the practice itself. It is more difficult to control what persons will convey, and with a smaller amount of time, there is a progressively greater need to outline considerations with team members prior to the beginning of a session (DiGiovanni et al., 2006).



References
Boniface, M., & Rashmi, M. (2012). Interest based bargaining: Innovating from the basics. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(9).
DiGiovanni, N., Brown, M., Boston, J. (2006). Implementing Mutual Gains (Interest-Based) Collective Bargaining. Morgan, Brown, & Joy, LLP. Retrieved from: http://www.morganbrown.com/docs/the%20general%20concepts%20surrounding%20interest%20based%20bargaining.pdf
Kennedy, B. L. (1999). Interest-Based Collective Bagaining: A Success Story. Industrial Relations Center. Retrieved from: http://irc.queensu.ca/sites/default/files/articles/interest-based-collective-bargaining-a-success-story.pdf
Kochan, T. A., & Lipsky, D. B. (Eds.). (2003). Negotiations and change: From the workplace to society. Cornell University Press.
Snell, S. A., Morris, S., & Bohlander, G. W. (2015). Managing human resources. Australia: Nelson Education.
Sprangler, B (2003). Integrative or Interest-Based Bargaining. Beyond Intractability. Retrieved from: http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/interest-based_bargaining