As presented by Barsky (2007), there are four approaches to negotiation and they are power,
rights, interests, and transformation (p. 69). They are not isolated approaches, but dynamic
methods that merge and converge as needed.
In the power approach, “winning is the highest value” and anything needed is used to achieve
that goal. As a leader of Marines, there have been times in my life when power was the only
approach, when winning the battle was the only goal, and when the methodology to achieve the
win was minimalized. As an educator, the power approach seldom applies. Between the
educator and student, the field is drastically uneven. Particularly in higher education, student
rights and values are highly deserving of respect and require protection.
In the rights approach, “the process is adversarial” (Barsky, 2007, p. 70). This legalistic
approach allows an outside source, the law, to dictate the best result based on the common good
and an understanding of rights. In my training as an attorney, I found myself at odds with this
approach coming from the Marine Corps mentality. As an educator, this kind of conflict is
readily resolved with a review of the code of conduct or other relevant legalistic guideline.
In the interests approach, “the quality of the ongoing relationship between the partied is more
important than determination of their legal rights” (Barsky, 2007, p. 70). This is the kind of
negotiation I worked with in the family court system, particularly where children were involved.
Parents frequently focused on power, and sometimes on rights. As a guardian ad litem, my focus
was always on the child, and I would frequently redirect the parents to the importance of the
ongoing relationship with the child(ren) as needed to keep negotiations going. It worked often,
though not always. As an educator, I find this is the type of negotiation we use in grading
conflicts. The relationship on which I focus is the one between the student and the learning.
Whatever grade they do or do not get, the important factor is that they keep learning and wanting
to learn.
The transformative approach is “oriented toward individual and relational processes, rather than
producing specific outcomes” (Barsky, 2007, p. 70). This approach is vital when resolution of
the actual process is impossible. My experience has seen this work in family court through a
devastating divorce or a death where there are unresolved issues. The conflicted members are
guided to a resolution that may have little to do with the conflict, but has everything to do with
their reaction to the conflict. In education, the only time I see this is in the marvelous maturation
process of growing to adulthood. I see students as freshmen who whine and complain about
homework, and papers, and bad grades they are given. I see students graduating who recognize
trials, and opportunities, and grades they have earned. This transformation is a wonderful thing
to behold, and is part of the conflict of life.
I love my job.
Reference
Barsky, A. (2007). Conflict resolution for the helping professions. (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Brooks/Cole.
MEAGAN GOAD:
“The power approach to negotiation views parties as competitors” (Barsky, 2007, p. 68). The
main purpose of this type of negotiation is to win, regardless of the how one goes about getting
there. Often times the resources are divided instead of everyone finding an acceptable
compromise. Positional negotiations fall into the power approach and will include: tilting the
process in your own favor, making extreme offers, having the other side make the first offer,
being secretive, bluffing, being patient, when making compromises make small concessions,
treating the other side as they treat you, threatening the other side, harassing the other side, and
making the other side feel good. When negotiating using power, it is held over the other person
to get one’s way.
“Rights-based negotiation is premised on what the relevant laws prescribe” (Barsky, 2007, p.
75). This type of negotiation is based on who has the better legal argument. It can also be
applied to organizations and their rules. This type of negotiation can be difficult because
people’s morals and what they believe is right may be different from another person’s morals
and belief of rights. When rules are developed and expressed, most people follow them without
much negotiation. Unfortunately, sometimes it comes to one person’s rights being more
important than another and creates a winner-loser situation. A negative of rule development is
that people in power typically make the rules, which will give them the upper hand to the rightsbased type of negotiation.
“Interests-based negotiation refers to a joint problem-solving process in which the parties strive
to resolve their mutual interest” (Barsky, 2007, p. 77). This type of negotiation is the use of
power with each other and will create a win-win situation. There is a seven part framework for
this type of negotiation beginning with a focus on interests. Next, is inventing options where
both parties will gain something. Third, is applying criteria that are fair for both parties. Next, is
improving communication between all involved people. Then, building a relationship based on
positive negotiating is next. Sixth, it is recommended to consider alternatives. Lastly, both
parties must be completely committed to the resolution.
The transformation style of negotiation provides another person to go between all parties
involved to work toward empowerment and recognition. Empowerment helps a person realize
what they want and provides them with the ability to analyze strengths and weaknesses of their
goal. Recognition helps a person be empathetic to others.
I feel like in my career, I am able to make use of each of these types of negotiation
strategies. The power-based negotiation strategy is used within my classroom, at times, with my
students. When collaborating with parents the interests-based negotiation strategy is
applied. Sometimes, I feel like my role is to become the negotiator between the parent and
student using the transformative strategy. The rights-based negotiation strategy I use when
enforcing our school rules.
Barsky, A. E. (2007). Conflict resolution for the helping professions (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Meagan –
I was a bit confused as I read your journal entry. It seemed to me that you simply recited the
listing given us in Barsky (2007). For power, the listing came from pages 73 and 74, for rights,
it was the follow-on from page 75, etc. Since only the quotes were cited, and not the concepts, I
became concerned that I had misunderstood the assignment or citation process. I consulted with
others regarding my own posting and felt comforted. I had to smile in agreement as to your
comment about using each type of negotiation – I think that is key!
References
Barsky, A. E. (2007). Conflict resolution for the helping professions (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Goad, M. (2014), Group Discussion Board Post 3, Negotiation Approaches, EDUC746-D01LUO-Fall 2014, dated November 4, 2014.
VINCENT PARKER:
This week Barsky (2007), introduced four approaches to negotiation based on the concept
of power, rights, interest, and transformation (p.69). Surprisingly, these methods were not
illustrated as individual specialized techniques, but as intersecting strategies that could operate
independent of each other depending on the dynamics of the negotiation process.
Looking at the power approach, “winning is the ultimate goal” with an attitude that say’s
I will do whatever it takes to win. At one point in my career I worked as a salesman on
commission. Power plays were the order of the day because the sale had to be made in order for
me to get paid. Ethics were minimized in order to achieve my sales quota based on the premise
that I did not come to work to make friends. Today however, the power approach is irrelevant
because the safety and rights of my clients take precedence over personal gain. When I contrast
this prevailing attitude with the power tactics of the past, I find myself praying that I will never
have to enter the power play arena ever again.
The rights approach attempts to establish a balance of power between negotiation parties
by imposing “rules of fair play” (Barsky, 2007, p. 70). Civil laws and official policies tend to
serve as a buffer against the deceitful tactics that are employed in the might is right approach to
negotiating a successful outcome between conflicting parties. As a former supervisor, I will
always cherish the employee relations counselors who intervened on the behalf the agency and a
problematic employee with goal of prescribing the best solution within the bounds of
maximizing the rights of both parties. By taking this approach in the negation process, I was
relieved of the anguish that was fostered by the non-constructive results of the power approach.
In the interests approach, becoming aware of the others parties” underlying interest” will
ultimately result in an ongoing relationship of fairness and mutual respect between both parties
during the negotiations process (Barsky, 2007, p. 70). I have recently taken a position as a
resident counselor for the intellectually disabled. At the beginning of my shift, I will conduct a
group session to entertain all client interest and reports of residential conflict. Once the values
have been discovered, an opportunity is immediately extended to the parties in conflict to devise
a plan that will result in a joint effort being made to solve the conflict in question. To my
surprise, the conflicts are resolved quite admirably in the least amount of time.
I am of the opinion that the transformative approach to negotiating as incorporating the
practice of total inclusion in the conflict resolution process. Barsky, (2007, p.71) suggest that to
achieve total inclusion both conflicting parties have to gain a better understanding of one
another’s situation in addition to maintaining control of over their respective destinies. I am of
the opinion that this is the least effective negotiation approach because both parties cannot get to
the root of the problem that is causing the conflict. Studying this approach reminded me of my
brother bitter devoice. Both he and his estranged wife were so caught up in their emotional needs
and perceived neglected values that the legal system had to step in and terminate their marriage.
However, the concept of transformation did prove to be a gratifying experience to the extent that
the failed marriage resulted with the both of them to seeking God’s divine wisdom. Their
acceptance of Christ resulted in a profound state of spiritual growth which subsequently allowed
them to simply forgive each other and move on with their lives.
Barsky, A. (2007). Conflict resolution for the helping professions. (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Brooks/Cole.
Vincent: Would it not be lovely if we didn’t need any of these approaches? Or maybe it would
not. We need the struggle to grow and gain strength. Your posting made me reflect on the
transformative power of Christ in our internal and ongoing conflict between spirit and flesh.
Your postings have a way of making me reflect on bigger issues. In the God model, all are used,
aren’t they? Power – God is the ultimate power. Rights – He gave us the basic laws. Interests –
There is no one more interested in our needs. And Transformation – Nothing is more
transformative than the love of Christ. Thank you for your insights.
REBECCA OLIVER:
Barsky (2007) identified negotiation as the interactions between two or more parties involved in
conflict (p. 65). Negotiations are required for many different reasons and there are four different
approaches to this form of conflict resolution. These four approaches are power, rights, interests,
and transformation (Barsky, 2007, p. 65). In negotiations it is all about the relationships between
those involved in the conflict. When the two parties are competitors and are not looking out for
the best interest of both parties a power struggle ensues. The involved parties will use dishonest
and possible violent means to acquire the upper hand, quite possibly resulting in war or
strife. The recent political election involving Democrats versus Republicans was a prime
example of people using political clout, financial resources, and intelligence in order to make
their opponent look bad in the public view in order to attempt to win the election.
The rights approach to negotiation focuses primarily on the rules governing the parties
involved instead of using power in order to resolve the issue. This may come into play if one
party has been bitten by the neighbor’s family pet or a yard has been vandalized by a
neighbor. The laws of the locality will govern the conflict if each party’s rights are unknown.
When the involved parties wish to maintain a relationship of some kind, then the
underlying interests of each party must be taken into consideration in order to have a more
amiable negotiation. This type of negotiation may be used during custody disputes. When
parents still need to have a relationship, and are looking at the best interest of the children as well
as each other, an amiable interest related negotiation needs to take place.
Transformation provides the involved parties with the ability to recognize the issues at
hand and helping one party empower themselves with knowledge that will help them in the
future. A recent interaction with my son involved transformation. As a special needs child, he
has limits that I often try to overlook, because I never want him to feel limited in his
potential. However, as he moves towards the workforce, his current desire is to be a fireman. I
have not told him that is impossible, but I have tried to guide him towards his strengths and focus
on what he is good at. I am still working on empowering him, but at least he recognizes some
jobs are harder than others.
Reference
Barsky, A. (2007). Conflict resolution for the helping professions (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Brooks/Cole
Rebecca:
Your posting breaks these element down to their simplest components. What a blessing. I tend
to make things more complicated sometimes. The example of guiding your son’s expectations
was an excellent one. I work with college students, and trying to aid them in identifying their
own goals, strengths, and areas of weakness can be challenging. I have several students who are
not native English speakers, yet I teach English composition. This presents conflict for some,
one in particular. We had a recent breakthrough when he finally acknowledged that he simply
cannot understand the assignments without assistance. Up to this point, he has maintained that
he could manage. While he will still likely fail the course, this transformation will allow him the
greater reward of greater learning.
SABRINA GRANT:
Interest based negotiations and power based negotiations are the most prevalent and applicable to
my professional experiences. At the end of each school year, coveted positions such as the Early
Intervention Teacher vacancy, result numerous candidates applying for the position with the
hopes of being selected. Some individuals resort to power based tactics such as using personal
relationships with members of the interview panel to gain leverage over other candidates. Some
candidates resort to showcasing the data from their students' standardized test scores to support
why they should be selected. These individuals showcase their teaching abilities by attempting
to prove their instructional methods are effective for all students. Interest based negotiation
tactics are applicable to this situation due to the fact that the individuals express their desire to
instruct lower performing students using what they deem to be effective instructional
methods. Obtaining this position will provide an opportunity for the individuals to have a
decreased workload from activities such as conducting parent conferences and maintaining a
gradebook. Their motives are somewhat self-centered and their overall expectations of the
position may not be reality.
Transformative and rights based negotiation practices are prevalent in cases of students with
special needs whose parents are somewhat reluctant to recognize that their child is not meeting
behavioral or academic standards. To support the findings of the school, district personnel are
assigned to observe the student behaviorally and academically. In conjunction with the evidence
obtained from the observations, school discipline referrals, and results of behavior management
plans, school based personnel are able to share their findings with parents to support the need for
additional interventions. In the case of students who are not meeting grade level academic
standards, school based personnel collect work samples to support the need for further academic
intervention for students. The results are shared with the parents and with parental consent,
plans are devised to help support students behaviorally and academically. In addition to the data
collected at the school level, parents are provided the opportunity to provide input in the
decisions made about their child. The rights based negotiation process is applicable in such
cases because parents learn the laws applicable to specific programs and make every effort to
ensure that their children receive the appropriate services as originally documented. If there is
any evidence of failure to adhere to the plan, parents resort to negotiation processes that may
involve legal counsel. This is something districts tend to avoid, therefore, a concerted effort is
made to ensure that the students are appropriately educated.
Reference
Barsky, A. (2007). Conflict resolution for the helping professions. Belmont, California:Thomson
Brooks/Cole.
Sabrina:
What a wonderful concept: “A concerted effort is made to ensure that the students are
appropriately educated” (Grant, 2014). I think in these few words you have succinctly stated the
goal of all of us in the field of education, particularly those of us enhancing our own education to
do more or do better at educating our students. Indeed this is, and must be, the goal of the
conflict in our students . . . a conflict that allows them to grown and learn, and hence, perhaps, to
succeed in their dreams and goals . . . hopefully, goals that the Lord has place upon their hearts
to enable them to follow His plan.
Reference
Grant, S. (2014), Group Discussion Board Post 3, Negotiation Approaches, EDUC746-D01LUO-Fall 2014, dated November 6, 2014.