Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Many individuals are led by ethics or a set of moral ideals in their daily lives. However, there are situations that may be unethical even while following the letter of the law. Slavery, for example, was both legal and immoral at the same time (Robinson, 2022). As a result, when parties engage in negotiations, the issue of how to assess behavior in terms of ethics or non-ethics emerges. With a lot of discussions about corporate ethics in the headlines these days, ethical negotiating strategies have become a complicated subject (Carrel & Heavrin, 2013). When it comes to what is good, right, or harmful, people frequently differ. Even if the parties know what is correct, self-interest may drive them to act in a different way.
Whether negotiating on your own behalf or on behalf of someone else, having a basic understanding of ethics and negotiation can be beneficial. Each ethical issue will have its own twists and turns, but there are a few rules that negotiators should remember when they’re at the table. Reciprocity, publicity, trust, universality, and heritage are the five most significant elements in negotiation ethics at the moment (Rockmann, Langfred & Cronin, 2019). Reciprocity is an ancient philosophy that encourages treating others as you would like to be treated (Gunia, 2019). Publicity is becoming increasingly crucial these days, as it should be remembered that if the content of the discussions gets public, the outcome would be disastrous (for example, it will be printed in a newspaper). The mutual desire to find an acceptable solution (agreement) is referred to as trust (Carrel & Heavrin, 2013). Because of the long-term memory of various storage media, versatility and legacy are also becoming increasingly crucial.
Deception, misrepresentation, bluffing, and falsification are frequently involved in ethical difficulties in job negotiations. Even though the methods utilized at the table involve ethically ambiguous gestures, if the parties conduct their discussions according to recognized principles of behavior, the means may be desirable (Carrel & Heavrin, 2013). Although there is a basic dichotomy between moral theory and negotiating practice, expressed in problem-solving deception, contemporary trends and practice almost always use gray zone methods. Modern negotiation, while constructed on some “golden” ethical principles, usually maintains a narrow balance between ethical and unethical behaviors, following the concept of the lesser evil (Rockmann, Langfred & Cronin, 2019). There has always been a disparity in the amount of information available to each party before discussions begin (Carrel & Heavrin, 2013). As a result, the more knowing party is deceived by passive concealment. Furthermore, when the validity of the data offered in the discussions is impossible to verify by any objective criterion, there is more room for deceit. While lying about one’s outcomes is immoral in many instances, it is a common negotiation approach that is now regarded legitimate when effective.
Because negotiations entail the sharing of information, another crucial ethical criterion is providing accurate information. False information results in poor decisions, which is terrible for negotiations outcomes (Carrel & Heavrin, 2013). In recent years, there was a rise in fake news, and verification of information has become increasingly difficult. While hesitant parties become untrustworthy partners, the ethics of information sharing is steadily shifting into the same murky region, balancing between delivering useful information concealed among a slew of indirect deceptions (Gunia, 2019). While this tendency is not inherently immoral, it is slowly but steadily becoming the standard for ethical negotiating.
References
Carrel, M. R., & Heavrin, C. (2013). Labor Relations and Collective Bargaining: Private and Public Sectors. Pearson
Gunia, B. C. (2019). Ethics in negotiation: Causes and consequences. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(1), 3-11.
Robinson, R. M. (2022). Business Ethics: Kant, Virtue, and the Nexus of Duty: Foundations and Case Studies. Springer Nature.
Rockmann, K. W., Langfred, C. W., & Cronin, M. A. (2019). Negotiation: Moving from Conflict to Agreement. SAGE Publications.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.