Journals / Alanya Akademik Bakış / 2022 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3

Can the Contribution of the “Principled Negotiation” Approach to Corporate Communication Be Measured? Negotiation Index Model

“İlkeli Müzakere” Yaklaşımının Kurumsal İletişime Katkısı Ölçülebilir mi? Müzakere Endeksi Modeli

Pages
3269–3286
Publication Date
2022-09-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The Model provides an objective measure of the extent to which the negotiating parties have adopted the Principled Negotiation, and provides a perspective for improving the negotiation process.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Harvard Negotiation Model, as one of the most important conceptual models in negotiation, introduced the "Principled Negotiation" developed by Fisher and Ury (1981).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The contribution of negotiation competence to corporate communication is quantified.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The Model provides an objective measure of the extent to which the negotiating parties have adopted the Principled Negotiation, and provides a perspective for improving the negotiation process.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İlkeli Müzakere · Kurumsal İletişim · Müzakere Endeksi

Abstract

Harvard Negotiation Model, as one of the most important conceptual models in negotiation, introduced the "Principled Negotiation" developed by Fisher and Ury (1981). However, there is no criterion that reveals the extent to which the Principled Negotiation can be applied. In this study, it is aimed to develop an Index to determine to what extent the negotiations are conducted “on the basis of principles”. The contribution of negotiation competence to corporate communication is quantified. The Negotiation Index Model was created based on Fisher and Ury (1981) using the The Balance Method. The Model provides an objective measure of the extent to which the negotiating parties have adopted the Principled Negotiation, and provides a perspective for improving the negotiation process.

Özet

Müzakere alanında en önemli kavramsal modellerden olan Harvard Müzakere Modeli Fisher ve Ury (1981) tarafından geliştirilen “İlkeli Müzakere” yaklaşımını ortaya koymuştur. Ancak İlkeli Müzakerenin müzakerelerde ne ölçüde uygulanabildiğini ortaya çıkaran niceliksel bir ölçüt henüz bulunmamaktadır. Bu çalışmada, müzakerelerin ne ölçüde “ilkeler temelinde” yürütüldüğünün belirlenmesine yönelik bir Endeks geliştirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Böylece müzakere yetkinliğinin kurumsal iletişime katkısı niceliksel hale getirilmiştir. Çalışmada, Fisher ve Ury (1981)’e dayanılarak Müzakere Endeksi Modeli adı verilen bir Endeks oluşturulmuştur. Endeksinin hesaplanma yöntemi olarak Denge Yöntemi esas alınmıştır. Müzakere Endeksi Modeli, müzakere sürecinde yer alan tarafların veya müzakere heyetlerinin İlkeli Müzakereyi ne ölçüde benimsediklerine ilişkin nesnel bir ölçüt ve müzakere sürecinin iyileştirilmesine yönelik bir bakış açısı sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARABACAK, H., SIĞRI, Ü. (2022). Can the Contribution of the “Principled Negotiation” Approach to Corporate Communication Be Measured? Negotiation Index Model. Alanya Akademik Bakış, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3, 3269–3286. https://ajindex.com/articles/456958

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. ARGENTI, P.A. (2011)
  2. Corporate Communication. New York, McGraw Hill-Irwin. ASHCRAFT, K.L., KUHN, T. ve COOREN, F. (2009). “Constitutional Amendments: Materializing Organizational Communication”. The Academy of Management Annals, 3: 1-64.
  3. CAPRIOTTI, P. (2011). “Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility through the Internet and Social Media”. I. ØYVIND, J. L. BARTLETT & S. MAY (Eds.). The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Social Responsibility (358-378).
  4. CARNEIRO, D., NOVAIS, P. & ANDRADE, F. (2013). “Using Case-Based Reasoning and Principled Negotiation to Provide Decision Support for Dispute Resolution”. Knowledge and Information Systems, 36: 789–826.
  5. CORNELISSEN, J. (2014). Corporate Communication: A Guide to Theory & Practice. London, Sage Publications. ERTEL, D. (1999). “Turning Negotiation into a Corporate Capability”. Harvard Business Review, 77(3): 55-61.
  6. FINNEGAN, A.C. & HACKLEY, S. (2008). “Negotiation and Nonviolent Action: Interacting in the World of Conflict”. Negotiation Journal, 24(1): 7 – 24. FISHER, R. & URY, W. (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York, Penguin Books. FISHER, R., URY, W., PATTON, B. (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books. FREEMAN, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, Pitman. GOODMAN M.B. (2004). “Today’s Corporate Communication Function”. S. M. OLIVER (Ed.). Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public Relations (217-243).
  7. HANSON, A. P. (2008). “The Trend toward Principled Negotiation in Major League Baseball Collective Bargaining”, Sports Law Journal, 221-246.
  8. HARAHOUSOU Y., KABITSIS, C., HAVIARA, A. & THEODORAKIS N. D. (2004). “The Olympic Games: a Framework for International Public Relations”. S. M. OLIVER (Ed.). Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public Relations (162-174).
  9. HEATH, R. L., PEARCE, W. B. & SHOTTER, J. (2006). “The Processes of Dialogue: Participation and Legitimation”. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(3): 341–375.
  10. JACOBS, G. (2004). “Communication for Creative Thinking in a Corporate Context”. S. M. OLIVER (Ed), Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public Relations (394-406).
  11. KANDIR, S.K., ÇERÇI, G., & UZKARALAR Ö. (2013). “Yatırımcı Duyarlılığı Temsilcileri: Yatırım Ortaklıkları Iskontosu Ve Tüketici Güven Endeksi Örneği”. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar, 7(2): 55-75.
  12. KARABACAK, H. (2017).
  13. Müzakere Oyunları. İstanbul,
  14. Optimist Yayınları.
  15. LAX, D.A. & SEBENIUS, J.K.