Procedural justice and a constructive approach to negotiating with stakeholders Jill Howieson

Procedural justice effect = the fairness of the procedure can enhance stakeholders satisfaction, and perceptions of overall fairness, regardless of the outcome of the decision.

The primary factors that contribute to judgements about procedural justice: opportunities for participation (voice) consideration of the stakeholderss views the neutrality of the forum the trustworthiness of the person enacting the process the degree to which the procedure is dignified, polite and respectful.

Quality of decision-making gains enough information from the stakeholder to handle the issues well neutrality – bases the advice on knowledge and not on personal biases correctablity – build in flexibility to correct decisions if not meeting needs conduct simple and efficient meetings understands the issues

Quality of treatment respect, politeness and dignity trustworthiness voice stakeholders needs and stakeholderss views taken into account allowed to vent if needed informational justice

Positional Negotiation It involves negotiating over positions and focuses on finding a solution that maximises your own gainusually to the detriment of the other stakeholders.

Positions Positions represent what stakeholders want or say they want: their goals, claims and demands.

Opportunities in using Positional Negotiation less time-consuming less preparation required may offer acceptable short to medium term solutions useful in one-off situations (no relationship) risk averse and protects own interests simple and efficient good in situations of difficult communications, high conflict or distrust

Risks in using Positional Negotiation inhibits flexibility relationships not central only satisfies substantive goals if you win focused on individual gain claims value/fixed pie short-term, one-off transactions that involve compromise unbalanced and unfulfilling agreements

Interest-based negotiation begins with an exploration of the problem. Stakeholders educate each other about their interests and then jointly problem solve on how to meet those interests. Interest-based Negotiation

Interests The needs, concerns and fears that motivate the stakeholders.

Substantive interests - satisfaction of content needs, e.g goods, services, money, legal rights Procedural interests - satisfaction with the way things are done, where, when etc Psychological/Relational interests - satisfaction of needs in relation to fairness, ongoing relationship, expression of emotion – the social dimension Principle interests - ethical, customary or cultural values Procedural Substantive Relational Satisfaction Triangle Principle

Alternatives Possible solutions or actions which do not requires agreement between the parties. The things we can do independently (without the other party).

Options All of the possible ideas for resolution which can be agreed to by the parties. The things we can do together (by agreement).

Legitimacy (independent criteria) The criteria by which the fairness of the option or agreement can be judged Independent or objective standards Precedent Industry standards Objective assessment Guidelines/Protocols Something that helps to say this option is fair not just because I say it is fair, but also because the [independent criteria] says it is

Risks in using interest-based negotiation –Needs commitment from all stakeholders –Open to exploitation where there are power imbalances –Time consuming and complex –Difficult in situations of conflict and distrust

Opportunities in using interest-based negotiation creative and flexible solutions builds better relationships potentially satisfies all types of interests opportunity for mutual gain creates value/expands the pie establishes trust, respect and future cooperation parties create own solution fair, satisfying and sustainable agreements good quality solutions encourages creativity focuses energy and attention on productivity rather than fighting

A constructive approach