Projects Negotiation And Conflict Report

The Projects Negotiation and Conflict Report is a communication tool that is used as the basis for managing negotiation, identifying conflict areas and stakeholder engagement.

The project characteristics of project 1 are mainly dependent on the perspective of Turner and Cochrane Four quadrant.

The justifications for these characteristics are based on the development of application, product alignment as well as engineering. It is found that the implications that are related with the payroll system would mainly be helpful in developing number of activities. The results or outcome that is analyzed after product analysis is helpful in developing number of operations which are very much helpful.

The project characteristics of project 2 are based on the perspective that mainly deals with procedure of organizational learning.

The justifications for these characteristics are basically based on innumerable processes which are mainly involved with it. The decision making is considered to be quite chaotic in nature which would considered to be quite complex in supporting different types of deviations which are generally associated with the people.

The project characteristics of project 3 are dependent on the perspective that mainly deals with various organizational learning.

The justifications for these characteristics are mainly based on number of change implication procedure that is mainly involved with the project work. The project would be quite complex in context to the changes that are mainly related with the people.

 in aligning the changes that are mainly associated with the people.

The project characteristics of project 4 are dependent on the perspective of Identity.

The justifications for these characteristics are mainly associated with various types of funding related project activities as the project investor helps in playing an important role for organizing funds in order to complete the entire project successfully..

For Project 1 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be considered to be high as the project owner is the individual who can be able to approve as well as reject the project by analyzing its feasibility.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are mainly related with variations in various operations and with the expectations that are generally not met.

The negotiating position of the designers will be high as they generally play a vital role in developing the payroll system with some exceptional design and that is further is quite helpful as well as advantageous for the successful project execution.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are basically dependent on different types of quality related issues as well as with the issues that are associated with delivery.

Negotiating Positions and Potential Conflicts in Relationships

The negotiating position of the contractors will be low as they are generally not required for executing the project activities however they are responsible of taking the entire project associated contract so that the project can get completed within the approved time.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are dependent on various quality related issues as well as on the delivery issues.

For Project 2 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be high as the activities that are associated with project governance as well as decision making mainly exists under the category of decision making process as well as the potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are associated with the design of the user as well as with the issues that are associated with user interface.

The negotiating position of the designers will be low as the designers are mainly needed for creating project related designs and thus they are generally not categorized under the category of decision making as well as project governance.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are mainly associated with inappropriate acceptance of design and challenges that are associated with the user interface.

The negotiating position of the contractors will be low as they do not have the power to make some important decision that is associated with the work of the project.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are associated with process obligations as well as problems that are related with change alignment.

For Project 3 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be high as the owner has the duty of keeping the people aligned with the work, which are associated with the project, and it is analyzed that the change implications are mainly considered as the part of owner’s job.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are associated with the people’s attrition, conflict among the people as well as denial of acceptance.

The negotiating position of the designers will be low as the designers are generally needed whenever proper design for the project is required to be made and thus the designers does not have any role to play in context to the management of people as well as change management.

Recommended Negotiating Methods

The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are mainly associated with the changes in the design as well as within various operations.

The negotiating position of the contractors will be low as project contractors does not have the duty to work for the change that are needed within the organization.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are mainly related with absence of proper communication, problems in deliverables as well as changes within the project.

For Project 4 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be high as the owner only approves the entire fund of the project.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are mainly dependent on the fund alignment and mismanagement of funds that are given.

The negotiating position of the designers will be low, as the designers are generally required for the need of designing thus they are generally not categorized within the category that reflects on project funding related requirement development.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are mainly associated with quality and payment related problems.

The negotiating position of the contractors will be medium as the contract of the project majorly requires funding for executing the project successfully.

The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are mainly  payment as well as quality related problems.

For Project 1 the negotiating position recommended should be based on the behavioural approach in context to forward strategy for payroll system.

For Project 2 the negotiating position recommended should be dependent on the structural approach for developing proper decision as well as for governing various operations that are mainly associated with the project. The government of Australia would help in developing and finishing the entire project within expected budget and time.

For Project 3 the negotiating position recommended should be dependent on the integrative approach of the project in order to contract with the people as well as changes that are generally done. It mainly reflects on stakeholder’s engagement along with the management related changes for supporting various types of changes that are needed in the business process of Queensland Health.

For Project 4 the negotiating position recommended should be dependent on the integrative approach in context to funding. It is mainly focussed in order to solve problems by creating proper project value so that they can be able to communicate with the various project stakeholders so that proper decision can be easily taken.

Preferred Forms of Procurement

For Project 1 the negotiating method recommended should be based on the integrated negotiation and thus the approach that is recommended is helpful in forming successive activities that are associated with development.

For Project 2 the negotiating method recommended should be dependent on the Fixed price negotiation and thus it will be helpful in forming proper successive development of actions so that proper alterations within the project supremacy as well as within the procedure of decision making can be made easily.

For Project 3 the negotiating method recommended should be integrative negotiation that suggests that it is beneficial in creating appropriate support for all the operations that would generally use for aligning number of activities. It is found that with the utilization of this approach both supports with people and change management.

For Project 4 the negotiating method recommended should be dependent on integrative negotiation as it is helpful in creating proper support for various operations that would generally be used for aligning lot of project related actions for the alignment of number of activities.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 1 is dependent on the framework agreement as the implications of the various operations would generally helpful in implying towards the development for the entire payroll system.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 2 is dependent on the procedure of contracting management as it is very much useful for aligning with the project operations.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 3 is Design and construct and it is generally helps in listing the steps of operation development. The main reason behind the selection of this approach is to collaboration, developing value for money as well as integration of design payroll.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 4 is dependent on the framework agreement and the entire agreement would generally be implied for aligning the project related operations which are associated with funding.

Alonso, E., 2016. Conflict, opacity and mistrust in the digital management of professional translation projects. Translation & Interpreting, 8(1), pp.19-29.

Beriker, N., Allen, S., Larson, M.J. and Wagner, L., 2018. Innovations in Doing Conflict Research: The Legacy of Daniel Druckman. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 11(1), pp.72-87.

Elfenbein, H.A., 2015. Individual differences in negotiation: A nearly abandoned pursuit revived. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(2), pp.131-136.

Kerzner, H., 2013. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.

Lee, D., Huh, Y. and Reigeluth, C.M., 2015. Collaboration, intragroup conflict, and social skills in project-based learning. Instructional Science, 43(5), pp.561-590.

Lloyd-Walker, B. and Walker, D., 2015, April. Collaborative project procurement arrangements. Project Management Institute.

Mahmoud, M.A., Ahmad, M.S., Yusoff, M.Z.M. and Idrus, A., 2015. Automated multi-agent negotiation framework for the construction domain. In Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, 12th International Conference (pp. 203-210). Springer, Cham.

Moore, C.W., 2014. The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict. John Wiley & Sons.