Negotiating on Thin Ice

1369 Words6 Pages
Negotiating on Thin Ice Thelma Myles Grand Canyon University Power, Politics, and influence 610 Jerry Griffin February 01, 2011 Negotiating on Thin Ice When negotiations reach a point of no return what tactic should the participant’s uses to draw them back to the table? The National Hockey League (NHL) and National Hockey League Players’ Association (NHLPA) will soon find the players and the owners at the table airing their grieves. Resolving the disparate interests is a matter of establishing a commonality of interests. Players and owners are adept at forging such realignment of participant’s interests. Both parties do the same when resolving conflict. Each opponent must persuade others to consider alternatives in the…show more content…
When these two power players join the organization they had a long list of accomplishment to their credit. Including the two negotiation disputes, which lead to the 10-day strike on the eve of the Stanley Cup playoffs and oversaw a 103-day lockout that lasted from October 1, 1994 to January 11, 1995. However, how could two major power players go so far off course to cause the 2004-2005 season to be cancel. Bettman power sources are legitimate, coercive, and, referent because he represent the owner of the NHL. The major power move by Bettman was to call the lockout for the 2004-2005 seasons. Goodenow power sources are legitimate, expert, coercive, and referent. Goodenow represent the players and his major power move was to reject the independent audit by Arthur Levitt Jr. Who was at one time the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The powers that limit both opponents in the negotiation were the influence and the toll the lock out began to have on the owners and the players. They did not truly have the interest of their parties as the focal point of the negotiation. This became a battle of who would be the person with total power to prevail in the situation. The "best alternative to a negotiated agreement."(BATNA) are critical to negotiation because you cannot make a wise decision about whether to accept a negotiated
Open Document