Negotiating commitments paper accompanying presentation
In today’s world, there are too many commitments that are made without considering whether the outcome or final deliverable is really attainable. This leads to lack of accountability since these commitments were mostly assigned to employees by their superiors and they did not have any input whether or not the outcome was realistic and doable. Stephan Haeckel recognized this problem when he states in his book Adaptive Enterprise “People in an organization may believe that expressing their uncertainties will be unpleasant, dangerous, or unproductive. They may then, for example, remain silent about problems that may delay an outcome or risks that should be considered” (Haeckel 150).
It is exactly this that leads to accountability problems. Employees have no ownership of the commitments and therefore do not feel as accountable as they would if they had had some input in defining the outcomes of the tasks. Therefore, Haeckel suggests that negotiations between the two parties take place during which each party will clearly state what it can and cannot do and what outcome will result. This will greatly increase accountability since now each party has an ownership of the commitment. The negotiations and commitments made have to be authentic, however, meaning that both parties say what they mean and mean what they say and also must understand what they mean. The desired outcome of these negotiations is a win-win agreement “that represents the highest common denominator of two separate agendas” (Haeckel 153).
Some Key points regarding how the negotiations are conducted revolve around honesty, total understanding, and deliverable outcomes (rather than actions or behaviors). It is important for participants to truly hold the mindset that these negotiations are truly a give and take. If one party is not willing to sacrifice their needs for the needs of the other party, negotiations will not work. Participants must be honest with one another and themselves regarding what will be done.
It is also imperative that deliverables are clearly detailed and discussed. Negotiators must have full knowledge of what will be expected of each party. This prevents confusion and is essential to the success of negotiating a commitment.
Finally, a key to this process is that outcomes are discussed, rather than actions. In the case of a manager / employee relationship, parties must negotiate what will be completed and delivered. The methods for completion are entirely up to the employee. It is important to note that in these negotiations, the employee’s needs must be spelt out as well. If the employee requires certain support items from a manager or expects some outcome in return, these expectations should be outlined as well. In this way, employees and managers are better able to reach their own goals because they understand what needs to be done in order to realize specific outcomes.
Clear understanding of tasks, accountability for results, foresight into goal attainment, fairness, and higher levels of trust are all extremely positive outcomes that can be achieved through commitment negotiation. For these reasons techniques such as those proposed by Haeckel can absolutely be advantageous to any organization, agile or otherwise.
References
Haeckel, Stephan. Adaptive Enterprise. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1999.
