Negotiation and Then Addresses How

¶ … negotiation and then addresses how they can be used to help the Marine Corp Recruitment Command. The two negotiation strategies discussed are positional bargaining and integrative bargaining. Both strategies have positive and negative aspects whereby they could both be helpful in the right situation to the United States Marine Corp Recruiting Command (MCRC). Positional Bargaining Positional bargaining entails defining what outcome you are willing to accept and then negotiating to achieve that outcome (or better) only. This negotiating tool is commonly used, especially as initial strategy.

The two most preeminent negotiation theorists, Fisher and Ury, denounce positional bargaining. They argued that positional bargaining requires a party to defend their position once that position has been attacked. As a result, the goal of the party is no longer dispute resolution, but the need to save face. The need to save face does not bring people to the bargaining table, the need to resolve a dispute or issue does (Mitchell citing Fisher and Ury, 1991). Positional bargaining is not without supporters.

Where a party's emotional interests may impede resolving the issues, positional bargaining can help. Emotional interests are party specific and will vary by the case. Sometimes they can lead a person to think with their heart instead of their head, in which case positional bargaining will effectively supply a party's will-power. Positional bargaining is also advisable where the interests prove to be too polarizing for the parties to work together (Mitchell citing to Lax and Sebenius, 1991).

Integrative Bargaining Integrative bargaining (also called "interest-based bargaining," "win-win bargaining") as a negotiation strategy is the total opposite approach to negotiation as positional bargaining. Here parties actively seek a "win-win" solution to the issue in dispute. In this strategy, the interests are often common to both parties (unlike in positional bargaining, where the issues are party specific). These interests are then resolved through negotiation, usually an independent negotiator or mediator, which often allows the parties to set aside their dispute.

This is so especially when the interests involve needs, desires, concerns, and fears felt by each side. They are the underlying reasons why people become involved in a conflict. It is difficult to have integration unless multiple issues are involved in the negotiation as the parties must be able to make trade-offs across issues in order for both sides to be satisfied with the outcome (Spangler 2004).

Integrative bargaining is widely held to be superior to positional bargaining because of the fixed positions of positional bargaining which results in compromise or no agreement at all. Integrative bargaining takes a much more pro-active approach to forging a deal based on the interests of all parties and to make all parties to a negotiation truly satisfied (Spangler 2004). In other words, integrative bargaining is a collaborative process which many times results in the parties helping each other to reach a mutually satisfactory long-term solution.

Marine Corp Recruiting Command The issues of settlement strategy are very important to the Unites States Marine Corp Recruiting Command for several reasons. First, the MCRC operates on a budget set forth by the United States Navy/Marine Corp has to include the entire operating budget for the MCRC. Therefore, the MCRC has to negotiate with the higher-ups in the Navy/Marines on order to maintain its very financial viability.

As the sole recruiting arm of the Marines, the MCRC, needs to purchase/lease office space and supplies, advertising and equipment to effectively convey its message. These activities will present additional opportunities for the MCRC to negotiate. However, the bigger negotiations these days will likely be a matter of far more public interest. In January 2007, the MCRC opened an office in Berkeley, CA, and began soliciting local high school students to enlist.

In January 2008, after local organizations began to protest the office and its tactics, the city commission of Berkeley passed several motions directly impacting the MCRC. One motion labeled the MCRC as "intruders" and another authorized a protest group by granting it a paring and a noise permit. While historically one of America's proving grounds for peace, love and happiness, the actions of the Berkeley commission.