1 Explain in 500 words in or suggest other objections they may not have considered. please type Given Alice Jones will b

[answerhappygod]

1 Explain in 500 words in or suggest other objections they may
not have considered. please type
Given Alice Jones will be meeting with Sharon Slade for a
negotiation session, it is likely that they both will be preparing
for their meeting and they both will have questions and concerns
they would like to address during the negotiation session. Of
course, some objections might lead the other party to get upset and
possibly get defensive, but in order to achieve a win-win solution,
it is best to remain calm, stick to the facts and continue to focus
on “the common path to a successful conclusion” (Opresnik, 2014, p.
101). Below are Alice’s three objections along with Sharon’s
responses that would ensure that the negotiation session remains on
track, positive and they have a win-win outcome: - Alice’s first
objection: Alice informs Sharon that it has only been one month
since she has been placed on the performance improvement plan
(PIP), and terminating her before the agreed three months would be
a breach to the agreement made between her and Jane. Sharon’s
response: In acknowledging Alice’s concern, Sharon could thank her
for showing courage and being honest as Netflix values those skills
and behaviors in their employees (Hastings, 2009, Slides 15 and
17). Sharon could also inform Alice that while she does not plan on
taking her off the PIP and move to terminate her before the three
months period is up, Netflix does not believe in using PIP as the
company believes “it is fundamentally dishonest” (McCord, 2014, p.
73). Alice’s second objection: Alice tells Sharon that she believes
that being placed on the PIP by Jane was to buy Netflix time to
terminate her. She also tells Sharon that she believes that it was
their plan all along, given they did not promote her and hired Jane
as the boss. Sharon’s response: Sharon thanks Alice for being
transparent and clarifies the reason for Jane’s hire. Sharon
informs Alice that the executive position required someone with
years of experience and qualifications for the job. Sharon
acknowledges that while Alice has 10 years of service at Netflix,
she only has 2 years of experience in her current position which
means that she was not qualified nor has the experience for the
executive position. She also informed Alice that Jane believes in
her and that is why she placed her on the PIP, to give her a chance
to improve her numbers before Netflix terminates her. Alice’s third
objection: Alice tells Sharon that if Netflix terminates her, she
will file a wrongful termination suit against the company. She
explains that she will claim that Netflix breached the Equal
Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 which prohibits “job
discrimination for reasons of race, religion, color, national
origin, and sex” (Encyclopedia, n.d., para. 1). Sharon’s response:
Sharon again thanks Alice for her honesty and reassures her that
there will be no need for that because Netflix does not plan on
violating any of her employment rights. Also, given she is already
on the PIP, if she does not improve in her numbers at the end of
the 3 months as agreed to by Jane, then Netflix can take the steps
to terminate her as she was already informed of the next steps.
Sharon also informs Alice that Netflix ensures that if they are
going to terminate underperforming employees, they ensure that
“adequate performance gets a generous severance package” (Hastings,
2009, Slide 23). In light of the above, it is evident that Sharon
will need to be prepared for the negotiation session with Alice. I
believe to cover all grounds, Sharon should consult with the legal
department at Netflix to ensure that any information she is willing
to provide to Alice is within their legal framework and does not
jeopardize Netflix or Alice.