A632.7.4.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

Reflect on the role of collaboration and getting to resolution in the process of decision-making. Rarely, if ever, do our decisions affect only ourselves. Consider the importance of getting other stakeholders involved; how can they help you make a better decision for all?  Detail a specific situation where you are faced with the decision, describe the process you went through and the outcome you were seeking. Identify 5 ways stakeholder involvement can help you make better decisions.  Did you achieve your objective?  Looking back at the decision you made and its consequence, was there anyone else that would have added value to the process? Identify 3 ways you may use this learning experience to make better decisions in the future?

Making a decisions, especially if it is something that impacts your life, or is of great value to you, is not something that should be done alone even if the final decision falls on you.  I believe most of us seek out the opinions and advice of other people when trying to make a decision.  Planning my wedding for example was something that required a lot of collaboration from a lot of people.  The stakeholders being my husband to be at the time and my family played a huge role in the final outcome.  

For example, the guest list alone was something that needed to be collaborated.  Even though it was my wedding, everyone involved felt they had a say in who was invited and who wasn’t.  There were conflicts, for example with my mother who wanted to invite family members who I did not even know, yet she felt it was the political thing to do since they were part of her family.  These resolutions were reached through compassionate dialogue, disclosure and listening.  Levine (2009) tells us that “full disclosure is evidence of a good-faith effort to work together toward resolution” (p. 96).  She made me understand that although it may not seem important to me, having them at my wedding was important to her.  I wanted my mom to be happy, and I also understood that she wanted to share this proud moment with her family.  We came to an easy agreement because I was willing to listen to her needs.  

The other stakeholders in my wedding were other members of my family and especially close friends.  Everyone had an emotionally vested interest in my wedding as I believe they all wanted me to be happy but also, they wanted to enjoy the event as well.  In planning the food and drinks, it was important for me to collaborate with my friends and the best man.  There was conflict with the best man because he felt that there were certain elements needed in regards to the bar.  He insisted that an open bar was important and it would make our guests happier, but we felt that it was way out of our budget.  Because he was also our lawyer, he was used to an attitude of “winning” and debated this mercilessly.  We had requested his help in organizing our wedding and he was unwilling to see our side of things and felt ownership over the process.  We didn’t want to upset him since he was offering his help voluntarily and out of the kindness of his heart.  Levine (2009) tells us that the challenge is to “let go of ego concerns” (p. 56) which was the most difficult part of the conflict for him.  During this conflict we used one of Levine’s principles of new thinking which was becoming open.  We sat down with the best man and had a heart to heart, explaining our budget and concerns but all within the context of our love and respect for him.  We entered into what Levine calls the “truth circle” and were able to open his eyes to our perspective.  A generous compromise was reached where an open bar was offered but for a limited time.

Stakeholders can assist in the decision-making process in many ways.  They can act as mediators helping those involved to openly communicate with each other.  Not only as the job of a referee but also as a vested individual in the situation.  Stakeholders can tell their stories and begin a domino effect in which each person in the group feels more comfortable to divulge their feelings and concerns.  Stakeholders can add new perspective and allow you to see another angle of the situation.  They can help you avoid that myoptic view and look at the conflict more holistically.  Stakeholders can also act as a resource, contributing their skills and experiences to the situation.  Lastly, they can add to the creative process.

Returning to my wedding, I feel that the collaboration of my family and friends did help me gain my objective which was to have a successful and happy wedding.  The fact that everyone was willing to listen put us all on a path to learning about each other and learning how to work with each other.  Levine explains that the process of learning lets you “discover, explore, and learn with everyone else what the best solution is” (2009, p. 98).  Coming into the planning of the wedding everyone had an expectation of what it was supposed to be like and how it should be planned.  The key was to align the expectations of each person with a common vision.  I believe we were able to achieve this objective.  

Looking back I think that we had a generous amount of opinions and views to make the wedding a dynamic and fulfilling event.  Although there could have been other stakeholders that might have been able to add to the process, I think generally speaking the essential parts were covered.  However, I do feel there could have been improvements in how some decisions were made.  First of all, I think that a preliminary vision could have been set forth by the bride and groom in the beginning.  Seeing that the wedding was ours and we had a higher vested interest in the outcome, a set preliminary vision could have at least set a standard for all the stakeholders to follow.  I think a brainstorming session before the planning with everyone involved would have been beneficial.  At my wedding we never actually sat down in a meeting with all the people who would be involved in the planning process and instead met with each person individually.  A group meeting, or set of meetings would have allowed all of us to share ideas and stories and listen to each person’s perspective.  

Levine’s cycle of conflict resolution does provide an excellent roadmap for resolving conflict and assisting in problem-solving experiences.  This is an excellent tool that can be used for wedding-planning or any other planning that is highly personal and emotional by nature. 

References

 

Levine, S. (2009). Getting to resolution: Turning conflict into collaboration (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

 

A632.6.3.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

Years back an old boyfriend and I decided to open up an art gallery together.  We had different viewpoints on how the business should be run and different business attitudes.  His attitude as the “artist” was more generous and laissez faire where I thought it very important to be involved in the business and with the artist that we showcased.  We fought continuously about the future of the gallery because our ideas and attitudes collided.  To begin with, the gallery required some money upfront, which at the time was a significant amount for two recent college graduates.  There were also many physical and personal resources that were needed to run the gallery.  We were both very set in our ways and neither of us wanted to back down from our ideals.  Eventually our inability to resolve this conflict resulted in the closing of the gallery.  Levine (cite) mentions four cost of conflict that are the result of unresolved conflicts.  The first one is direct cost.  Our gallery had a direct cost because we lost the money that we had primarily invested in the gallery plus outstanding costs that had to be paid to artists that were left out in the cold who we had contracted to show in our space.  The second cost of conflict is what he calls productivity cost or lost time.  Obviously because we could not resolve our conflict, we were not able to continue showcasing artists.  Our gallery had begun to receive some recognition and we were on a path of expanding our artist showcase.  The third cost of conflict is continuity cost.  Because we were unable to resolve our differences in business management, we ended up severing our personal relationship as well which caused many other direct costs due to the fact that we lived together.  Lastly, Levine mentions the emotional cost involved which in our case was destructive.  I not only lost a business partner but my best friend and boyfriend.  

Looking back, if I would have had access to the resources I do now and known about Levine’s (2009) Ten Principles of New Thinking, I may have addressed our conflicts in a different way.  Levine describes an old way of thinking and contrasts it with a new way of thinking.  For example, the idea of scarcity is something that any business owner fears.  However, over the years, I have learned to believe in abundance and that lack, or the idea of lack, is only in the mind.  During my conflict over the gallery I was also always very concerned with losing resources.  Levine tells us that we need to flip the switch and think of it as creating partnerships instead.  Everyone knows that two heads are always better than one.  I know for a fact that I have had far greater successes in my life when I have teamed up with people.  Along with more creative partnerships it is also important to foster sustainable collaboration.  Again, working in collaborative teams renders higher results.  Some of the other principles that Levine mentions are transforming negative feelings into creativity and being open with our emotions.  It is impossible to run a business if you do not share your feelings.  With my boyfriend we would get upset with each other because of assumptions we made regarding what the other person was feeling instead of clarifying exactly what we wanted. We could have avoided a lot of miscommunication this way.  

Lastly, I always tried to reach a consensus or decision using logic and trying to revert to traditional business models. My boyfriend, being very creative and intuitive, always suggested we try other new ways of doing things.  And although I liked his ideas, I was afraid to make the plunge because my life savings was involved.  Looking back, I am sure we could have reached a middle ground if we made a stronger effort to resolve our differences.  

I definitely believe that we could have avoided many cost of conflict would we have adapted an attitude of resolution instead of defending our positions.  Levine explains that “learning and being open to influence puts you in a mind-set of discovery, allowing you the luxury of not knowing the answers or the specific path that you will take” (2009, p. 98).  When we open ourselves to other perspectives, voices and ideas we open ourselves to other opportunities.  No one knows everything about everything, yet during a conflict our emotions and pride restrain us from learning.

I think the takeaway from this exercise is to learn to think from the heart, but not necessarily from the emotions.  To step away from the conflict far enough were you are not emotionally invested but still able to see other perspectives.  And most importantly, I feel that I will be more adept to “listening” to others instead of fighting to maintain my position.

References

Levine, S. (2009). Getting to resolution: Turning conflict into collaboration (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

A632.5.5.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

 In our reading, protected values (PV) are defined as values that are absolute and inviolable in which you are willing to accept trade-offs (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001).  We are unwilling to sacrifice these values for any financial or personal benefit.  My protected values revolve around humanitarian issues such as the environment and human and animal rights.  One great example of honoring one of my PV’s was when I used to work for a nonprofit that provided surgical care to children in developing countries.  Generally speaking, my entire team of doctors and nurses had a protected value to provide care to the poorest of the poor.  All of us shared this same value since our entire team was made up of volunteers who gave of their money and time to participate in these medical missions.  Yet, one of our greatest challenges was the lack of resources in these countries to perform these surgeries and most importantly, the resistance we sometimes met from government agencies and medical entities from these countries.  Ironically, our partners in these countries who supposedly shared these values with us, and on most occasions hosted our missions, were usually the first ones to stray from the protected values and make trade-offs. Most of the time this occurred if any kind of financial issue or expense was at stake.  The bottom line always being that, “yes” they wanted to help the children of their country, but “no”, they were not willing to contribute additional funding or participate in certain expenses. 

Another protected value that I notice does not always hold up for me or people who share this same value, is animal right’s issues.  I am extremely sensitive to the welfare of animals and am the first to voice my opinion on the inhumane treatment of animals. I’ve rescued many animals in my day, gave them homes, searched for homes for them and donated a lot of personal finances towards the cause.  Yet, the last 10 years I have become progressively allergic to all types of animals, but worst of all, cats.  I have still rescued cats, but more and more it becomes more difficult because of my allergies.  I used to just severely medicate myself with antihistamines, anti-inflammatory drugs, inhalers, etc. so that I could continue to rescue them but I have made the trade-off to not rescue cats because I no longer want to jeopardize my health with all of these chemicals and medicines.  My allergies with dogs also affect me and sometimes I will make the trade-off to not bring dogs to my house to avoid having symptoms and instead try and find other home for them or take them to a shelter when I find them.

At the end of the day I think you have to weigh out the degree of trade-offs.  I ask myself: is my health at risk? Can I financially afford to support my protected values? Am I harming someone else in the process?  I don’t think any value can really be set in stone because there is always the possibility of them getting tested and the risk of having to accept a trade-off.

There are various ways to address decision-making in a way to honor your protected values.  Some strategies are shaping the context of your decision, challenging protected values by asking about other conflicts, recognizing that zero tolerance of unprotected values is untenable, and lastly understanding the market value of those protected values (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001).  

 In my case, when trying negotiating with others, I try to put myself in their shoes and empathize with their values.  I feel that this type of behavior shows compassion and many times can sway the other party towards your decision because they see that you are willing to see all perspectives. 

References

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001).

Wharton on making decisions, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

A632.4.5.RB_PALUGODCAROLYN

Deception or misinterpretation during negotiations is quite common as a way of gaining advantage (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001).  Hoch et. al. (2001) describe two types of lies, lies of omission and lies of commission.  Lies of commission tend to be more condemnable than those of omission.  There are four ways in which information can be misinterpreted according to Hoch et. al. (2001).  The first, Reservation Prices, is highly misguiding since many times what negotiating partners claim as their reservation price, many times could be lower then what they claim.  This is easily seen in supermarket mark downs.  Items are advertised as “on sale” when in effective, the price has really gone from a mark-up to its standard price, manipulating the customer into thinking there is a discount when there isn’t.  The second misrepresentation of information that can be evaluated is Interests.  In this case a negotiator may pretend they do not share the same interests as their negotiating partner as a ways of asking for extra concessions.  During my negotiations with the real estate agent when I tried to get the rent price lowered, we both misrepresented our interests. The real estate agent claimed that the owner of the apartment was not in a hurry to rent the apartment because he really didn’t need the money.  I in turn told the agent that I was not in a hurry to find a place and would be willing to wait for something cheaper.  Both she and I had a mutual interest for me to move into the apartment as quickly as possible but were negotiating for extra concessions.  I waited to pay less for example.  The third misinterpretation that is mentioned is Intentions.  Going back to my example when dealing with the real estate agent for my apartment,  the real estate agent misrepresented information regarding how many people were looking at the apartment.  This is a common tactic used by real estate agents.  When I tried to negotiate the price and verbalized my intent to wait or search for a cheaper apartment, she told me that there were other people lined up that had an interest in the apartment and it would be rented by the next day if I didn’t take it. This was her way of trying to get me to concede to the original price. A few days later she contacted me and told me the owner would consider dropping the price if I was still interested.  The last misrepresentation that can be used is Material Facts.  This is probably one of the most serious misleading information as the negotiator is bluntly lying about the facts.   I have encountered this type of misrepresentation of information when shopping on Amazon and a seller gives erroneous information about the product.

One example of overstating a claim could clearly be seen on my resume.  During my younger years when I had little work experience I would sometimes over exaggerate my talents or completely lie about my skill levels in order to get employment.  I am a very fast learner and in some instances was sure that I would be able to do the job yet I also recognized that if I didn’t have the job experience they were looking for, they wouldn’t give my resume a second look.  In this case I weighed out the cost and benefit of my deception realizing that the benefit outweighed the possible cost (getting caught for example) and also justify my deception by recognizing my quick learning curve (Hoch et. al., 2001) .

I consider myself to be a very honest person and I hold others to the same ethical standard.  I am okay with white lies but my standard for lying or misrepresenting information is based on the following guideline which is harming no one.  If my deception does not harm anyone physically, emotionally or mentally, I think it is acceptable.

References

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.