Negotiation Strategy
People involved in different scenario’s everyday are faced with decisions to be made. Involved with these decisions are negotiation strategies. When people use negotiation strategies, two key strategies come to mind. The first is integrative bargaining and the second is disruptive bargaining. Integrative bargaining is where two different people or parties agree to a mutually beneficial agreement based on the parties interests coming to a win-win solution. Disruptive bargaining is where the parties come to an agreement led by mistrust and suspicion by one party ending in a win-lose solution (University of Phoenix, 2006).
Kent Teacher Strike Teachers will negotiate contracts that will not only affect their personal lives but also affect the classroom environment. In Kent, Washington teachers went on strike because an agreement on the contracts could not be met. One of the key components was classroom overcrowding with the change of 29 students going down to 26 students in the classroom (Beckley, 2009). While this may not seem like a challenge to some, students may get lost in the mix or not enough personal attention and may miss some of the learning experience otherwise obtained. In the example of the Kent schools, the description would be an integrative bargaining strategy. While some would say having teachers on strike only hurts the community and students, others would argue that smaller classrooms would be beneficial to the students. Due to the teachers receiving a smaller classroom agreement with the school district the teachers will gain more one on one time with the students to go over class work and exercises. The school district will continue to educate the students with the same instructors they had previously and promote education to the community.
Although The Kent schools had to give in to some of the stipulations of the teachers, the result was not taking the bad ends of the negotiation. That described this as Integrative bargaining. Integrative
Kent Teacher Strike Teachers will negotiate contracts that will not only affect their personal lives but also affect the classroom environment. In Kent, Washington teachers went on strike because an agreement on the contracts could not be met. One of the key components was classroom overcrowding with the change of 29 students going down to 26 students in the classroom (Beckley, 2009). While this may not seem like a challenge to some, students may get lost in the mix or not enough personal attention and may miss some of the learning experience otherwise obtained. In the example of the Kent schools, the description would be an integrative bargaining strategy. While some would say having teachers on strike only hurts the community and students, others would argue that smaller classrooms would be beneficial to the students. Due to the teachers receiving a smaller classroom agreement with the school district the teachers will gain more one on one time with the students to go over class work and exercises. The school district will continue to educate the students with the same instructors they had previously and promote education to the community.
Although The Kent schools had to give in to some of the stipulations of the teachers, the result was not taking the bad ends of the negotiation. That described this as Integrative bargaining. Integrative