Research/argumentative paper about Achilles and Agamemnon Research - 1

/argumentative about Achilles and Agamemnon - Research Paper Example His conflict with Achilles begins when Agamemnon is forced to give up his captured prize, the woman Chryseis who was the daughter of the local priest to Apollo. When Agamemnon refused to ransom her to her father, Apollo sent a plague against the Greek army until the girl was returned. Agamemnon agreed to return her on condition that he got the other girl, Briseis, who had been awarded to Achilles. Its easy to see the argument that takes place after that as childish pouting on the part of Achilles, but this conflict tells us perhaps more about this society than the epic battle between Hector and Achilles. In the conflict between Achilles and Agamemnon, it is possible to see the social structure of the Greek army as a collection of allies rather than an encampment of a single, unified, cohesive army. Its also clear that the insult to Achilles is not only the lack of respect toward him as also being a leader of men in the taking away of a prize, but also in the over-generosity of Agamem nons later peace offerings which would subjugate Achilles as a servant of sorts to Agamemnon. Through his behavior, Achilles allows us to understand important subtleties of Greek social life and gain insight into important concepts in our own social structure. The ancient Greeks were organized according to a very specific social structure that had many subtleties not necessarily recognized today. Rather than being written as a specific code, these subtleties were contained in various expected forms of behavior and informal codes of conflict. For example, it is often forgotten among Achilles critics that the Greek army was not the single entity we think of today when we think of the American forces. Instead, it was a collection of armies, each led by their own leader as each leader agreed to fight on the side of Agamemnon (Donlan, 2002). This meant Agamemnon owed his

Conflict, Decision Making, and Organizational Design Research Paper

Conflict, Decision Making, and Organizational Design - Research Paper Example One way is to engage negotiation strategies. Negotiation can be observed everywhere in strong and subtle ways – in the market, haggling for the best prices, commissioning a young, talented artist for a new project; or closing a huge deal with a known company. There is more to negotiation than mere compromise. Negotiation is an interaction that occurs when 2 or more parties attempt to agree on a mutually acceptable outcome in a situation where their preferences for outcomes are negatively related. Two opposing positions come to a compromise. Lax and Sebenius (1986) add that in negotiation, a better outcome through joint action is achieved rather than when each party would act independently. The element of conflict also arises due to varying preferences and priorities of the different parties. Negotiation becomes a way to resolve such conflicts and compromise on a joint decision, usually, the middle ground stand. McGrath (1984) claims that negotiation is a mixed-motive process - the negotiating parties cooperate to reach an agreement and at the same time, compete to fulfill their own interests. From these definitions of negotiation, it is apparent that negotiators should possess several skills in order to be successful in getting what they bargain for. At the same time, negotiation entails multiple processes that occur simultaneously within each negotiating party such as decision making, research, critical judgment and effective communication, among others. Negotiating strategies involve bringing opposing parties together face to face wherein each individual or group brainstorm on their decisions for the negotiation. When each of the negotiating party becomes aware of the other’s proposed stand or idea, it then becomes the time for bargaining. In the case of business negotiations, this is the space between their reservation prices for the product or service offered and the assumed reservation price of the other party. They come up with their own BAT NA or their â€Å"best alternative to a negotiated agreement†, a strategy proposed by Fisher & Ury (1981). Thompson and Leonardelli (2004) explain that when the first cards set out the table during negotiations fail, then BATNA becomes a fall back alternative of negotiators. BATNA considers all options available for both parties including the reservation price, market information and aspiration levels of each negotiating party. Knowing the other party’s alternatives will help facilitate one’s decision-making process if these are compared with one’s own alternatives (Buelens & Van Poucke, 2004). 2. Determine how evidence-based management could be applied to the work environment you researched. Reay, Berta & Kohn (2009) defined evidence-based management as being â€Å"about making decisions through the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of four sources of information: practitioner expertise and judgment, evidence from the local context, a critical evaluation of the best available research evidence, and the perspectives of those people who might be affected by the decision† (as mentioned in Briner, Denyer, and Rousseau, 2009, p. 19) Applied in the work environment of health care and health insurance this definition would translate to upholding high standards of care. Integration of the best available evidences from thorough research and practice should deliver high quality patient-centered care considering the patient’