In-Depth Analysis on Decision Making: A Comprehensive Essay – Uniresearchers

Main Body
Review of Literature

As identified by Owen (2015) workplace problems and issues can be better resolved when analytic approaches to decision making can be applied. This has been further ratified by Howard (1982) who presented the Decision Analytic Approach to negotiation. Raiffa’s approach entails the perspectives of negotiation from the standpoint of the primary party where in the elements of the contract also represent the other parties. As per this theory there are three main sets of information which are crucial for the negotiation process and its relative success. To begin with it has been also ratified by Owen (2015) that in concurrence with the views of Howard (1982) presenting alternatives to the negotiated settlement remains quintessential for the success of the negotiating process. The second element which has also been explored by Malhotra and Bazerman (2008) is the Parties sets of interests followed by the relative importance of the interests which also should be assimilated for better negotiation processes.

Bazerman and Moore (2008) further explore that when the three elements as defined above are collated, the process of negotiation can be initiated. There are two major elements of the process of negotiation and while the first primary task of negotiation pertains to Claiming Values, the second primary task remains the process of Creating Value. This stands coherent with the findings of Moore et al. (1999) who state that ideally a decision analytical process should be able to both evaluate the options based on which the decisions can be made while a complex analysis is used to determine the short and long-term benefits which can be obtained. However, this has been argued by Thatcher, Jehn and Zanutto (2003) who state that the usability of the decision analytics process is underlined in the fact that decisions which are made after such processes are ideally rationalised and hence simplified. Owen (2015) also argued that by basing the resolution of workplace issues on the negotiations which are derived, it is seen that better mutual benefits for the two parties involved can be obtained. In the case scenario which has been examined it is seen that owing to the stringent nature of the company, SINOPEC is not open to negotiation and has been working on unilateral contracts. However, in this situation, OS technical services is able to develop a beneficial contract by completing the work in lesser time than allocated.

At this stage it is important to reiterate that SINOPEC has a reputation of being an organization which works upon, unilateral contracts which are granted through the bidding process. This means that the companies conducting business with SINOPEC are forced to agree with the terms and conditions of the company and while a mutual benefit for the two companies entering a contract is found, it is seen that the business contracts do not allow much scope of negotiations from the contractors, which have been selected through the bidding process. However, in one of the cases, it was identified that OS Technical Services was not only contracted the project but OS Technical Services was also able to negotiate the working contract as per their benefits with the effective use of negotiation skills in practice. SINOPEC was convinced to provide the support services based on which the operational cost of OS technical services was reduced and apart from completing the project before the specified time limit, this negotiation also helped the supplier in gaining a good reputation in the market.
Raiffa’s Negotiation Analytic Approach
Bazerman Behaviourial Insight Model

A section reviewing ways of improving negotiation in general (e.g. using the prescribed steps of the decision analytic approach, possibly compared to other approaches) their strengths and weaknesses and the relevance of all of this for your situation;
Steps of Negotiation Analytic Approach and Relevance to this situation Parties

• Perceived Interests
• Alternatives to Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)
• Creating & Claiming Value
• Individual Negotiating Behaviour
• Social Behaviour in Negotiation

References:

Bazerman, M.H. and Moore, D.A., 2008. Judgment in managerial decision making.

Howard, R., 1982. The art and science of negotiation. Howard Raiffa, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University.

Malhotra, D. and Bazerman, M.H., 2008. Negotiation genius: How to overcome obstacles and achieve brilliant results at the bargaining table and beyond. Bantam.

Moore, D.A., Kurtzberg, T.R., Thompson, L.L. and Morris, M.W., 1999. Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiations: Group affiliations and good vibrations. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 77(1), pp.22-43.

Owen, D., 2015. Collaborative decision making. Decision Analysis, 12(1), pp.29-45.

Thatcher, S.M., Jehn, K.A. and Zanutto, E., 2003. Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12(3), pp.217-241.