Each constituency might oppose the process, resulting in the immediate end to it.
Other might suggest that the process continue, but only until the negotiators know what the other side wants. However, if all goes well and each constituency assents to it, it is time to meet and begin the process. During opening, known as phase II, each side takes turns framing the discussion. There are no positions given in the opening statements, just the issues, or problems, each side wishes to discuss.
Once these issues are broached, negotiators immediately begin phase III, exploration. Exploration is actually a feature of both traditional and interest-based bargaining. The difference is in the number of people involved. In a traditional bargaining setting, the two chief negotiators meet in private and discuss possible options for the settlement. Exploration during interest-based bargaining is just the opposite; it is a real brainstorming session devoted to listing options to the issues presented in the opening.
The facilitator for the session will list the ideas for use at a later time. The brainstorming session will yield many, many possible solutions and variants to each of them. The exploration phase of interest-based bargaining does not aim to reach a compromise; rather, it attempts to create something new by defining a problem and proposing solutions to it.
Phase IV, focus, begins when bargaining teams acknowledge that exploration has been exhausted and then turn to the solutions generated by phase III. Breakout teams are formed with negotiators from both sides, and these teams will probe the solutions to one or more problems. This can be either easy or difficult, depending upon the mandates originally given by the constituencies. If the mandate is not positional, then the process can come to full flower; if the mandate is more positional, there is a risk that one or both sets of negotiators will try to keep the focus on one specific solution.
The phase IV focus discussions will inevitably give real shape to the process or show the limitations of a superficial acceptance of interest-based bargaining. Once the solutions have been vetted for usefulness, it is time to launch phase V, the process of crafting the final agreement. If the process has been genuine the eventual agreement will be a true win-win contract. There are challenges, however. The first is actually crafting the agreement, which is built on the solutions accepted during focusing; the second challenge can be convincing both constituencies that the agreement is indeed the best one possible.
That can be daunting, but with good will and correct management of the bargaining process, both labor and management can succeed. The final aspect of phase V, agreement, is the foreshadowing of contract administration following adoption. If the process has been truly interest-based, contract administration should be fairly simple because, during the focus phase, the negotiators will have discussed each possible scenario and prepared a reaction to it.
That, in a nutshell, is the outline of interest-based bargaining. Interest-based bargaining is not simple, but it can yield remarkable results. I have chosen several case studies that describe the process well and lead to greater understanding of it. After training, the District and the Association negotiators began the interest-based bargaining process.
Finally, negotiators uncovered the cause of the three percent request: teachers were having trouble paying for their child care. Discussion and brainstorming produced the final contract: a two percent raise for all district personnel, not just teachers, and a commitment from the District to fund a child care co-op.
- Citizen Emperor: Napoleon in Power (Napoleon, Book 2).
- The Reading of Russian Literature in China: A Moral Example and Manual of Practice (Palgrave Studies in Cultural and Intellectual History)!
- The War of Desire and Technology at the Close of the Mechanical Age;
- Simplicius : on Aristotle on the heavens 3.7-4.6.
In Chattanooga, early discussions in produced nothing but animosity. However, the District hired a new negotiator who had never used the positional bargaining process and was the leader in the move to interest-based bargaining. Both sides attended a training session on interest-based bargaining presented by the U. Once the bargaining sessions began, the FMCS representatives attended each session ensuring that everyone stayed on task. The final result was a contract with a six percent raise, a twenty-five percent raise in life-insurance coverage, intercoms in the schools by and a bigger role for teachers in the administration of some programs.
Both sides have formed an award-winning partnership. A bargaining specialist from the Chattanooga Teachers Association reminds the reader that moving to interest-based bargaining is more than an attitude adjustment. There must be a strong local and management team in place and everyone must be involved in the process.
Finally, everyone must remember that it is still bargaining. Interest-based bargaining between Kaiser Permanente Hospitals and Medical Centers and the coalition of Kaiser Permanente unions began well enough. Both teams were well-versed in the process and all constituencies had agreed to it. Bargaining was moving along well when the negotiators hit a snag.
Some of the KP managers did not agree with the monetary settlement and wanted to negotiate the monetary section of the contract themselves. Some of the managers were so intransigent that the CEO was informed and called to decide the issue. Work environments are warm, collaborative, and welcoming places where people help and support one another. Employees are united by loyalty; leaders emphasize sincerity, teamwork, and positive relationships. Purpose is exemplified by idealism and altruism.
Work environments are tolerant, compassionate places where people try to do good for the long-term future of the world. Employees are united by a focus on sustainability and global communities; leaders emphasize shared ideals and contributing to a greater cause. Learning is characterized by exploration, expansiveness, and creativity. Work environments are inventive and open-minded places where people spark new ideas and explore alternatives. Employees are united by curiosity; leaders emphasize innovation, knowledge, and adventure.
Enjoyment is expressed through fun and excitement. Work environments are lighthearted places where people tend to do what makes them happy. Employees are united by playfulness and stimulation; leaders emphasize spontaneity and a sense of humor. Results is characterized by achievement and winning. Work environments are outcome-oriented and merit-based places where people aspire to achieve top performance. Employees are united by a drive for capability and success; leaders emphasize goal accomplishment.
Authority is defined by strength, decisiveness, and boldness.
Charleston Library Conference: Full Schedule
Work environments are competitive places where people strive to gain personal advantage. Employees are united by strong control; leaders emphasize confidence and dominance. Safety is defined by planning, caution, and preparedness. Work environments are predictable places where people are risk-conscious and think things through carefully. Employees are united by a desire to feel protected and anticipate change; leaders emphasize being realistic and planning ahead.
Order is focused on respect, structure, and shared norms. Work environments are methodical places where people tend to play by the rules and want to fit in. Employees are united by cooperation; leaders emphasize shared procedures and time-honored customs. These eight styles fit into our integrated culture framework according to the degree to which they reflect independence or interdependence people interactions and flexibility or stability response to change.
Styles that are adjacent in the framework, such as safety and order, frequently coexist within organizations and their people. In contrast, styles that are located across from each other, such as safety and learning, are less likely to be found together and require more organizational energy to maintain simultaneously. Each style has advantages and disadvantages, and no style is inherently better than another.
An organizational culture can be defined by the absolute and relative strengths of each of the eight and by the degree of employee agreement about which styles characterize the organization. On the basis of decades of experience analyzing organizations, executives, and employees, we developed a rigorous, comprehensive model to identify the key attributes of both group culture and individual leadership styles. Eight characteristics emerge when we map cultures along two dimensions: how people interact independence to interdependence and their response to change flexibility to stability.
The relative salience of these eight styles differs across organizations, though nearly all are strongly characterized by results and caring. The spatial relationships are important. Proximate styles, such as safety and order, or learning and enjoyment, will coexist more easily than styles that are far apart on the chart, such as authority and purpose, or safety and learning. Achieving a culture of authority often means gaining the advantages and living with the disadvantages of that culture but missing out on the advantages and avoiding the disadvantages of a culture of purpose.
Inherent in the framework are fundamental trade-offs. Although each style can be beneficial, natural constraints and competing demands force difficult choices about which values to emphasize and how people are expected to behave. It is common to find organizations with cultures that emphasize both results and caring, but this combination can be confusing to employees. Are they expected to optimize individual goals and strive for outcomes at all costs, or should they work as a team and emphasize collaboration and shared success?
The nature of the work itself, the business strategy, or the design of the organization may make it difficult for employees to be equally results focused and caring. In contrast, a culture that emphasizes caring and order encourages a work environment in which teamwork, trust, and respect are paramount. The two styles are mutually reinforcing, which can be beneficial but can also present challenges. The benefits are strong loyalty, retention of talent, lack of conflict, and high levels of engagement.
Savvy leaders make use of existing cultural strengths and have a nuanced understanding of how to initiate change. Top leaders and founders often express cultural sentiments within the public domain, either intentionally or unintentionally. Having a deeper, more transcendent purpose is highly energizing for all of the various interdependent stakeholders.
And when we are setting the rules for the securities markets, there are many rules we, the SEC, must follow. In the battle with lions, wolves have terrifying abilities. With a strong desire to win and no fear of losing, they stick to the goal firmly, making the lions exhausted in every possible way. The eight styles can be used to diagnose and describe highly complex and diverse behavioral patterns in a culture and to model how likely an individual leader is to align with and shape that culture.
Using this framework and multilevel approach, managers can:. Our research and practical experience have shown that when you are evaluating how culture affects outcomes, the context in which the organization operates—geographic region, industry, strategy, leadership, and company structure—matters, as does the strength of the culture.
Consider the case of a best-in-class retailer headquartered in the United States. The company had viewed its first priority as providing top-notch customer service. It accomplished this with a simple rule—Do right by the customer—that encouraged employees to use their judgment when providing service. In measuring the culture of this company, we found that like many other large retailers, it was characterized primarily by a combination of results and caring.
Unlike many other retailers, however, it had a culture that was also very flexible, learning oriented, and focused on purpose. As the retailer expanded into new segments and geographies over the years, the leadership strove to maintain an intense customer focus without diluting its cherished culture. Although the company had historically focused on developing leaders from within—who were natural culture carriers—recruiting outsiders became necessary as it grew. The company preserved its culture through this change by carefully assessing new leaders and designing an onboarding process that reinforced core values and norms.
Culture is a powerful differentiator for this company because it is strongly aligned with strategy and leadership. Delivering outstanding customer service requires a culture and a mindset that emphasize achievement, impeccable service, and problem solving through autonomy and inventiveness. Not surprisingly, those qualities have led to a variety of positive outcomes for the company, including robust growth and international expansion, numerous customer service awards, and frequent appearances on lists of the best companies to work for.
The chief executive of an agriculture business was planning to retire, spurring rumors about a hostile takeover. The CEO was actively grooming a successor, an insider who had been with the company for more than 20 years. Our analysis revealed an organizational culture that strongly emphasized caring and purpose.
The potential successor understood the culture but was far more risk-averse safety and respectful of traditions order than the rest of the company. Given the takeover rumors, top leaders and managers told the CEO that they believed the company needed to take a more aggressive and action-oriented stance in the future. The board decided to consider the internal candidate alongside people from outside the company. Cultural dynamics are a frequently overlooked factor in postmerger performance. Three external candidates emerged: one who was aligned with the current culture purpose , one who would be a risk taker and innovative learning , and one who was hard-driving and competitive authority.
After considerable deliberation, the board chose the highly competitive leader with the authority style. Soon afterward an activist investor attempted a hostile takeover, and the new CEO was able to navigate through the precarious situation, keep the company independent, and simultaneously begin to restructure in preparation for growth.
Mergers and acquisitions can either create or destroy value. Numerous studies have shown that cultural dynamics represent one of the greatest yet most frequently overlooked determinants of integration success and postmerger performance. An assessment of the cultures revealed shared values and areas of compatibility that could provide a foundation for the combined culture, along with important differences for which leaders would have to plan: Both companies emphasized results, caring, and order and valued high-quality food, good service, treating employees fairly, and maintaining a local mindset.
But one operated in a more top-down manner and scored much higher on authority, especially in the behavior of leaders. Because both companies valued teamwork and investments in the local community, the leaders prioritized caring and purpose. At the same time, their strategy required that they shift from top-down authority to a learning style that would encourage innovation in new-store formats and online retailing.
Once they had agreed on a culture, a rigorous assessment process identified leaders at both organizations whose personal style and values would allow them to serve as bridges to and champions for it. Then a program was launched to promote cultural alignment within 30 top teams, with an emphasis on clarifying priorities, making authentic connections, and developing team norms that would bring the new culture to life. Finally, structural elements of the new organization were redesigned with culture in mind. A model for leadership was developed that encompassed recruitment, talent assessment, training and development, performance management, reward systems, and promotions.
- 1. La Mesa/Spring Valley School District and the La Mesa/Spring Valley Teachers’ Association?
- Mesa of Sorrows: A History of the Awatovi Massacre;
- Can We Bargain—Amicably? A Primer on Interest-Based Bargaining.
- Grow up already!--An OPM3® primer;
- Kevin McClouds Principles of Home.
- Corey Halaychik | SUNY Maritime College?
- Citations per year!
Yet during a decade of helping leaders design aspirational cultures, we have seen a clear trend toward prioritizing learning to promote innovation and agility as businesses respond to increasingly less predictable and more complex environments. And although learning ranks fourth within our broader database, small companies employees or fewer and those in newer industries such as software, technology, and wireless equipment accord it higher values.
Consider one Silicon Valley—based technology company we worked with. Though it had built a strong business and invested in unique technology and top engineering talent, its revenue growth was starting to decline as newer, nimbler competitors made strides in a field exploding with innovation and business model disruption. Company leaders viewed the culture as a differentiator for the business and decided to diagnose, strengthen, and evolve it. We found a culture that was intensely results focused, team based caring , and exploratory a combination of enjoyment and learning.
After examining the overall business strategy and gaining input from employees, leaders aimed for a culture that was even more focused on learning and adopted our framework as a new language for the organization in its daily work. They initiated conversations between managers and employees about how to emphasize innovation and exploration.
Although it takes time to change a culture, we found that the company had made notable progress just one year later. And even as it prepared for an impending sale amid ever greater competition and consolidation, employee engagement scores were on the rise.
Lessons In Library Leadership: A Primer For Library Managers And Unit Leaders
We studied a Europe-based industrial services organization whose industry began to experience rapid and unprecedented changes in customer expectations, regulatory demands, and competitive dynamics. Special librarians also leverage online resource management applications to make evidence-based decisions on purchases, training, department or practice support, and marketing of underutilized yet valuable resources. Lucidea delivers best-in-class software with our flagship products, SydneyEnterprise and GeniePlus.
ETS was among the first to see SydneyEnterprise, and among the first clients to migrate. Key decision makers chose SydneyEnterprise for several reasons, including:. Finding the perfect ILS for your organization involves doing a lot of due diligence, and should be based on much more than a canned software demo. At Lucidea we love to work with educated clients, and we believe that long term professional relationships with mutual benefit are the best kind! Contents What is a Special Library?
What do Special Librarians do? How do you build a Special Library strategy? How are solo Special Librarians different? What does success look like for Special Librarians? What software do Special Librarians use? How do Special Librarians leverage library software? Request a Demo.
What is a Special Library? Often, tacit knowledge is what employees of an organization need in order to perform core job requirements start a new project launch a new product However, tacit knowledge is difficult to share, and frequently this valuable form of knowledge is lost when someone leaves an organization to retire or pursue other career opportunities. How do Special Librarians market their products and services? How do you know when you are successful?