Project 1: Negotiating Position and Conflicts in Relationships

The Forward Strategy for payroll system would be helpful for the developing the project 1 of payroll system. The NCTP of diamond perspective would be helpful for the consideration of the activities so that the project 1 of Forward Strategy for payroll system would be implied successfully. The implication of the NCTP operations would also help in forming the consideration of the project in terms of Novelty, Complexity, Technology, and Pace.

The major justification of the NCTP characteristics of forward strategy for payroll system is based on the alignment of the improved project processes. The project comprises of technology implementation and it would be required for aligning with the consideration of the effective operation. 

The characteristics of the project 2: Governance and decision making was based for the activities aligned with the inclusion of the supportive development. The key decision making and project governance is characterized by the organizational learning process. The organizational learning process would be developed for sorting out the inclusion of the development.

The justification of the characteristic of the project governance and effective decision making would be based on the implication of the learning curve and its use for the indefinite deployment of the activities. The project governance and decision making would be supported by the implication of the learning curve analysis for the development of the project. 

The characteristics of the project 3: people and change making was based for the activities aligned with the inclusion of the supportive development. The people management change implication is characterized by the organizational learning process. The organizational learning process would be developed for sorting out the inclusion of the development.

The justification of the characteristic of the people management and alignment of change implication would be based on the implication of the learning curve and its use for the indefinite deployment of the activities. The people management and alignment of change implication would be supported by the implication of the learning curve analysis for the development of the project.

The project characteristics of project 4 are Identity Perspective as the alignment of the operations for the funding is deployed for the successive integration management. The alignment had shown that the funding is deployed by the consideration of the identity functions.

The justifications for these characteristics are formed for carrying out the inclusion of the project of funding and it would result in listing the formation of the developed alignment of the activities.

Project 2: Negotiating Position and Conflicts in Relationships

Forward strategy for payroll system

For Project 1 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The project deliverable and the operation development would be responsible for the determination of the negotiating position of the owner for the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system. The owner would play key role for the project decision making and would not alter any activity in project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system. Hence, the negotiation position of the owner would be low.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system

The project deliverable and the operation development would be responsible for the determination of the negotiating position of the owner for the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system. The designer would not be included for the deployment of the activities of project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system. Hence, the negotiation position of the designer would be low.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system and the designer would not be included for the management of these activities.

The negotiating position of the contractors will be medium as the contractors are responsible for the formation of the support from external to the project. The medium power of negotiation would tend to from the deployment of the support activities of the forward strategy of payroll system project development. The contractors are responsible for most of the consultation in the project development.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 1: Forward Strategy of Payroll system and the contractor would be included for the management of these activities.

Project 3: Negotiating Position and Conflicts in Relationships

For Project 2 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective governance and decision making operations for the project deliverable. The High position of the owner for the governance and decision-making had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project decision making. The project development would be supported by the owner and it would be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 2: governance and decision-making.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 2: governance and decision-making would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 2: governance and decision-making and the owner would be responsible for the management of these activities.

The negotiating position of the designer will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective governance and decision making operations for the project deliverable. The low position of the designer for the governance and decision-making had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project governance and decision making. The project development would be supported by the owner and the designer would not be responsible for the completion of the project 2: governance and decision-making.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 2: governance and decision-making would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 2: governance and decision-making and the designer would be not be responsible for the management of these activities.

The negotiating position of the contractor will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective governance and decision making operations for the project deliverable. The medium position of the contractor for the governance and decision-making had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project governance and decision making. The project development would be supported by the owner and the contractor would take part in the completion of the project 2: governance and decision-making.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 2: governance and decision-making would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 2: governance and decision-making and the contractor would be partially responsible for the management of these activities.

For Project 3 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective people and change management operations for the project deliverable. The High position of the owner for the people and change management had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project management. The project development would be supported by the owner and it would be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 3: people and change management.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 3: people and change management would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 3: people and change management and the owner would be responsible for the management of these activities.

The negotiating position of the designer will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective people and change management operations for the project deliverable. The low position of the designer for the people and change management had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project management. The project development would be supported by the designer and it would not be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 3: people and change management.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 3: people and change management would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 3: people and change management and the designer would not be responsible for the management of these activities.

The negotiating position of the contractor will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective people and change management operations for the project deliverable. The low position of the contractor for the people and change management had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project management. The project development would be supported by the contractor and it would not be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 3: people and change management.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 3: people and change management would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 3: people and change management and the contractor would not be responsible for the management of these activities.

For Project 4 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below.

The negotiating position of the owner will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective funding activities operations for the project deliverable. The High position of the owner for the funding activities had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project management. The project development would be supported by the owner and it would be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 4: funding.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 4: funding would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 4: funding and the owner would be responsible for the management of these activities.

The negotiating position of the designer will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective funding activities operations for the project deliverable. The low position of the designer for the funding activities had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project management. The project development would be supported by the designer and it would not be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 4: funding.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 4: funding would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 4: funding and the designer would not be responsible for the management of these activities

The negotiating position of the contractor will be associated with alignment and formation of the effective funding activities operations for the project deliverable. The low position of the contractor for the funding activities had been deployed for the alignment of the successive project management. The project development would be supported by the contractor and it would not be his/her responsibility for taking care of the completion of the project 4: funding.

The rejection of the final deliverable of the project 4: funding would be dependent for the alignment of the operations and forming the management of the successive deployment management. The formation of the operations would align with the development and alignment of the successful completion of the project 4: funding and the contractor would not be responsible for the management of these activities

Structural approach should be used for the completion of the negotiation position of the project 1: forward strategy for interaction process. The project 1: forward strategy for interaction process would be carried on step by step for ensuring that it would be completed successfully. The negotiation strategy used in project 1: forward strategy for interaction process would form the responsibility of operations of the project. 

Strategic approach should be used for the completion of the negotiation position of the project 2: governance and decision making. The project 2: governance and decision making would be carried on strategically for ensuring that it would be completed successfully. The negotiation strategy used in project 2: governance and decision making would form the responsibility of operations of the project.

Behavioural approach should be used for the completion of the negotiation position of the project 3: people and change. The project 3: people and change would be carried on by analysis of the behaviour of the people for ensuring that it would be completed successfully. The negotiation strategy used in project 3: people and change would form the responsibility of operations of the project.

Structural approach should be used for the completion of the negotiation position of the project 4: funding. The project 4: funding would be carried on step by step for ensuring that it would be completed successfully. The negotiation strategy used in project 4: funding would form the responsibility of operations of the project.

For Project 1 the negotiating method recommended should be aligned with the formation of the sequential development of the activities and operations. The alignment of the successive forward strategy with the Staged Negotiation would help in forming the development of the successive operations. The implication of the staged negotiation would help in forming the development of the operations for supporting the integration of the profound operational development.

For Project 2 the negotiating method recommended should be aligned with the formation of the Integrative Negotiation as the formation of the project governance and key decision making is supportive alignment of the operations. The implication of the governance and decision making would align the usefulness of the Integrative Negotiation.

For Project 3 the negotiating method recommended should be dependent for the formation of the change implementation and people management. The use of the Integrated Negotiation would help them in forming the inclusion of the operation development. The deployment of the activities would help in forming the allocation of the operations for the management of the intrusion tools. The formation of the operations for the deployment would help them in forming effective operations.

For Project 4 the negotiating method recommended should be aligned for listing the process of funding in the project and Fixed Pie Negotiation would be aligned for the integration of the operations. The funding of the project is cost dependent and the listing of the inclusion would support the management of the successive development mode.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 1 is Design and Construct because the forward strategy for payroll system would be resulted by the deployment of the design. The payroll system development would be largely responsible for the alignment of the operations capable of the alignment of the design and construct.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 2 is Framework Agreements as the activities of the project governance would result in forming the solution of major issues for the management of the activities. The project governance and decision making is developed by integrating a framework for the inclusion of the activities.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 3 is Integrated Chain Management as the implication of the operations would help in forming the management of the changes in the project. The management of the people and implementation of the change would be influenced by the help of the chain management procurement.

The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 4 is Cost reimbursement as the funding would result in influencing the final deliverable of the project. The inclusion of the activities would form the effective development of the operations. The Cost reimbursement would help in forming the allowance of the operations favourable for the deployment of the operations.

Bordone, R. C., & Viscomi, R. A. (2015). The wicked problem of rethinking negotiation teaching. Negotiation Journal, 31(1), 65-81.

Dorochoff, N. (2016). Negotiation Basics for Cultural Resource Managers. Routledge

Dorochoff, N. (2016). Negotiation Basics for Cultural Resource Managers. Routledge.

Frank, A. K., & Crothers, A. G. (2017). Borderland Narratives: Negotiation and Accommodation in North America’s Contested Spaces, 1500-1850. University Press of Florida.

Jones, S., Jeffrey, S., Maxwell, M., Hale, A., & Jones, C. (2018). 3D heritage visualisation and the negotiation of authenticity: the ACCORD project. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24(4), 333-353.

Li, C. C., Wu, L., Li, C., & Tang, J. (2017). Exploring meaning negotiation patterns in synchronous audio and video conferencing English classes in China. CALL in a climate of change: adapting to turbulent global conditions–short papers from EUROCALL 2017, 194.

Powell, K. E., & Bartlett, L. (2016). Bridging the Gap: A Joint Negotiation Project Crossing Legal Disciplines.

Raby, R. (2018). Using the International Negotiation Modules Project (INMP) to Build a Learning Community. In Student Engagement and Participation: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 652-666). IGI Global.

Wang, Q., Kilgour, D. M., & Hipel, K. W. (2015). Facilitating risky project negotiation: An integrated approach using fuzzy real options, multicriteria analysis, and conflict analysis. Information Sciences, 295, 544-557.

Wang, Q., Kilgour, D. M., & Hipel, K. W. (2015). Facilitating risky project negotiation: An integrated approach using fuzzy real options, multicriteria analysis, and conflict analysis. Information Sciences, 295, 544-557.

Wolff, R. (2015). Book Review: Private Dispute Resolution in International Business: Negotiation, Mediation, Arbitration, 3rd edn, by Klaus Peter Berger.(Wolters Kluwer, 2015). Journal of International Arbitration, 32(6), 711-713

Wolff, R. (2015). Book Review: Private Dispute Resolution in International Business: Negotiation, Mediation, Arbitration, 3rd edn, by Klaus Peter Berger.(Wolters Kluwer, 2015). Journal of International Arbitration, 32(6), 711-713.