Implementing Bargaining Technics to Help Satisfy Mutual Needs

Angelina Spaulding
OGL 498: Pro Seminar I
College of Letters and Sciences
Arizona State University

Implementing Bargaining Technics to Help Satisfy Mutual Needs

It is likely that many people believe that the outcome of a negotiation session will
have a clear winner and clear looser. One person who gets what they want, and the
other person is still left wanting. This type of ...positional bargaining... (p. 221) style
prevents both parties from reaching a compromise that could likely benefit both groups.
Bolman and Deal (2008) discuss Fisher and Urys (1981) concept of ...principled
bargaining.... (p. 221) a style that intendeds on satisfying the needs of both negotiating
parities. This barging style can most likely be achieved if four strategies are taken in to
consideration during the negotiation process. Consider the following story of how a Girl
Scout Troop decided to spend their money as a group, and how the ultimate group
decision had been facilitated by the four strategies associated to principled bargaining.
Troop 1617 had been together for many years. When this story takes place most of
the scouts in the troop were between 17 and 18 years old, which marked the retiring of
the troop. This also included the liquidating of the troop funds. The troop leaders
provided the scouts with the chance to determine how the money would be spent as a
troop. This should have been an easy assignment, yet the group struggled to come to a
conclusion due to varying interest.
The first step to principled bargaining ...is to separate people from the problem (p.
221). Some of the troop members had only been with the group for a short while, and
other scouts in the troop had been part of the group since the conception of the troop
thirteen years earlier. This discrepancy in troop tenure created tension between group
members, because the older members did not feel that the newer members should have
equal power in the decision-making processes. Since the newer members did not
equally help in raising the money over the years. This could have derailed a solution to
the problem, however the troop leader helped to remove this controversy by humanizing
the situation. The troop leader explained that each person in this group is an equal

member of the troop, and should have an equal position within the group. In the
simplest perspective, the leader helped to show the girls that amount of years served
should not be the focus of this decision. The troop leader rather emphasized the human
side of the argument that we are all together as one, and that the real concern at the
moment is how to allocate funds that would hopefully provide the greatest benefit to all
members of the troop.
The second strategy is to focus on interests, not positions (p. 221). At this
point of the negotiation stage every person in the group had brainstormed potential ways
to spend the money. Some members wanted to take the money and put it towards a
special Girl Scout themed Disney World Adventure. Other members of the group
wanted to spend some of the money on a local trip or event, and donate the rest to help
support younger troops. This divide had caused more tension within the group. The
troop leader helped the group to understand the perspective of each person involved.
The leader asked the girls why they wanted to go to Disney world. Everyone learned
that these troop members had never been to a Disney theme park, and thought that this
was a good opportunity to go with friends and earn special Disney scout patches and
pins. Those that wanted to spend some of the money thought it would be fun to go on a
camping trip and then use the remainder of the money on helping a younger sister
troop achieve their goal of visiting Juliette Gordon Lows, the founder of Girl Scouts,
home in Savanah, GA (Juliette Gordon Low Birthplace Home Page). The girls that
wanted to help the younger troop out wanted to give the scouts a chance for a large
adventure during their more impressionable years, and hopefully would fuel desire to
stay in scouting over time (at that time the Scouting community in Central Maryland had
very low member numbers). The troop leader helped to bring out the what, behind the
why in this situation. Even though each mini coalition within the troop had a position on
what to do with the money, it was the interest of each coalition that had to be coaxed so

all parities understood the others perspective.

The ...third stage is to invent options for mutual gain instead of locking on to
the first alternative that comes to mind (p. 222). At this moment the members of troop
1617 understand that every person in the group has equal power to help make decisions
and the interests of all parties have been expressed. Since each coalition has a
perspective on how the money was to be spent, the leader asked the group to almost go
back to step one. Brainstorm more options. We had two primary directions the group
had wanted to go, so the leader asked us to think beyond our initial perspectives and
come up with other alternatives to spend the money. Some suggested donating all the
money, some said we should spend the money on a special evening out at a high end
restaurant, some suggested alternative trips, and some others suggested going to
special local events with the money. At this point it seemed like we had so many options
that the group did not know what to do with the money.
This helps to lead into step four, which states that ...objective criteria standards of fairness for both substance and procedure (p. 222) to help both parities
feel that neither group is being taken advantage of and motivates the overall group to
come to a satisfactory resolution for all individuals involved (B&D, 2008). In this
particular case of Troop 1617 during step four the group decided to identify any themes
related to the suggestions for spending money. This helped the group to identify he
criteria that the group, originally unknowingly, had in uncommon during this negotiation
processes. The troop recognized that overall the group wanted to do something unique
with the money, take a trip or go to an event, and use the money to help others.
Becoming aware of these three objectives helped the troop to gain perspective and
awareness of the overall direction the group needed to move towards to reach a
resolution.
What did Troop 1617 end up doing with the money? At the end of the scouting

year the troop held a camping trip to Luray Caverns in Virginias Shenandoah (Luray
Caverns Home Page). This had been unique to ever troop member, because none of
the scouts had every visited this extraordinary site. This also met the objective of taking
a trip. This trip also met the objective of helping others. Troop 1617 invited the younger
sister troop to tag along, by paying for the entire campsite for the two night three day
adventure. It was great experience. We were able to help teach the younger girls our
camping skills that we had developed over the years, and this also helped the younger
girls to see the value in staying with the organization as they had the chance to see the
older scouts in action. This had been a very satisfying trip, which had been facilitated by
the four principal bargaining methods that developed by Fisher and Ury (1981) (B&D,
2008).

References:
Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, Choice, and
Leadership. Jossey Bass: San Francisco
Luray Caverns Home Page. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://luraycaverns.com/
Juliette Gordon Low Birthplace Home Page. (2016). Retrieved from
http://www.juliettegordonlowbirthplace.org/