Negotiation is among the several alternative dispute resolution methods that involve settling disputes without engaging courtrooms ( Campbell, 2015) . Disagreeing parties arrive at agreements without litigation usually with the help of a third party. Arriving at out of the court agreements requires planning which is an integral aspect for successful negotiations. Failing to plan adequately may lead to one party being able to take significantly more concession than the other part would have been willing to give ( Goldberg, Sander, Rogers & Cole, 2014) . Subsequently, this may result into unrealistic expectations as well as terms of agreement. The negotiation meeting between Parents Against Drunk Driving (PADD) and Mr. Napier as such requires considerable planning to ensure all both parties get their fair share of justice. The following negotiation plan will be useful in guiding aggrieved parties to reach at an agreement. The plan will take into consideration the positions of parties, their strengths, needs, and weaknesses.
Contract information and parties
The negotiating parties include Mr. Napier and the PADD which entered into a contract requiring Mr. Napier to give a speech on driving while intoxicated. On their part, PADD offered compensation to Mr. Napier that would see him get fifty thousand dollars in ten days after delivering his speech to PADD delegates. Additionally, Mr. Napier was bound by a morality clause in the contract that required him to desist from any actions that would tarnish the image of the PADD. Such actions would include public drunkenness, public indecency among others. Moreover, the contract required that any party that did not fulfill its part of the contract was bound to cater for costs and fees that would ensue in case of litigation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Location and expected duration
The negotiation meeting is expected to take place at the Golf Resort Hotel in Palmtreal where PADD had rented space for the conference. The decision to have the negotiation meeting taking place at this venue is advised by the need to cut on costs that would come with seeking another place for the meeting. Additionally, the location is deemed as convenient to both parties since PADD delegates are already presented at the venue; thus it would only require Mr. Napier to be compensated for his transport to the venue.
It is expected that the negotiation meeting will take three hours to give ample time for involved parties to present their grievances. Additionally, taking longer time may be detrimental to the image of PADD given that it may attract more publicity given the frenzied media reports that have already been doing rounds.
Reasons for negotiations
Numerous reasons have been flaunted for the negotiations. First, PADD holds that Mr. Napier is in breach of the contract despite having given a speech at the PADD conference. As such Mr. Napier on his part is of the view that he delivered the speech and that the incident where he was arrested by police for drunk driving happened after he had fulfilled his part of the contract. Furthermore, PADD’s reputation has been damaged by Mr. Napier’s incident therefore thus making a negotiation rather litigation would mitigate further damage to PADD’s reputation.
The decision for negotiation has been arrived at by the PADD delegates who have been advised of the possible outcomes if they opted for litigation. The possible outcomes as stated in the contract would include PADD to pay for attorney’s fee and all accruing costs given that failing to pay Mr. Napier after the speech would seem that PADD had failed to fulfill its part of the contract. The need for negotiations had not been anticipated while forming the contract given that it was expected all parties will fulfill their part of the contract.
Probity information
Probity is integral in negotiation meetings. PADD is regarded as guided by high moral character noting that they are strongly against driving under intoxication thus showing their value for human life. Mr. Napier on the other hand is also viewed as being decent noting that he has held his part of the contract. It is expected that all parties will engage in a decent way devoid of shouting at each other or interrupting presentation of one another. Given the high stakes and the frenzied actions that have been witnessed of the media, all parties are expected to maintain confidentiality of the meeting proceedings as well as outcomes. To ensure this is complied with probity and confidentiality agreements as well as a code of conduct have been provided and will be signed by all parties as a mitigation measure.
Preparation for the meeting
Studies show that there is need to prepare adequately for all negotiation meetings. As indicated earlier, failing to prepare adequately will result in one party giving more concession to the other party than it was originally planned ( Goldberg et al.,2014) . Therefore, in the negotiation meeting involving PADD and Mr. Napier, strict measures have been put in place to ensure that all parties are served with the negotiations plan as well as all parties participating in the meeting. Key address areas in the meeting as noted earlier include the contract terms and the outcomes of failing to fulfill terms of the contract. Additionally, the negative publicity that has resulted from the incident with Mr. Napier being arrested by police for drunk driving will be addressed.
Alternatives to negotiation agreement
The negotiation meeting is expected to arrive at satisfactory agreements within the stipulated time within which the meeting is expected to take. As such PAD as well as Mr. Napier are expected to exhaust negotiations and explore the available options to ensure that the negotiations meeting provides acceptable and satisfactory outcomes.
Negotiation strategies
During the negotiations meeting a win-win negotiation strategy will be used given the critical role that win-win strategies play in negotiations according to Mircică, (2014) in his studies . PADD will offer to pay the compensation and require Mr. Napier to become an ambassador for PADD’s mission to educate the nation against drunk driving for six months. Second, PADD will provide an offer where his compensation is cut by ten percent to help PADD cater for the refund which will be advanced to registrants who checked out of the hotel. Mr. Napier will be given an opportunity to decide which offer to take.
Contending as a strategy will also be employed with PADD seeking to pay as little as possible of the speaking fee. The strategy will see Mr. Napier paid less than the amount in the contract to cater for the lost registration fee noting that it was Mr. Napier’s conduct that led to some registrants checking out from the hotel.
Opinion on strengths and weaknesses of the case
PADD’s case can be viewed as having several strengths among them the fact that Mr. Napier was in breach of the contract specifically the morality clause. It can be argued that Mr. Napier’s driving under intoxication incident was a breach of the contract. Additionally, PADD can successfully attribute the bad publicity to Mr. Napier’s incident. However, the case is weak on the basis that Mr. Napier’s incident had happened after he had finished delivering his speech.
References
Campbell, J. C. (Ed.). (2015). Successful Negotiation, Trieste 1954: An Appraisal by the Five Participants . Princeton University Press.
Goldberg, S. B., Sander, F. E., Rogers, N. H., & Cole, S. R. (2014). Dispute resolution: Negotiation, mediation and other processes . Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Mircică, N. (2014). Constructive communication in effective negotiation. Analysis and Metaphysics , 13 , 64-72.
