Projects Negotiation and Conflict Report for Queensland Health Payroll Program
Verified
Added on  2023/06/13
|6
|1599
|157
AI Summary
This report discusses the negotiation positions and conflicts in relationships of the participants of four projects under the Queensland Health Payroll Program. It also recommends negotiation approaches and methods for each project.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
PROJECTSNEGOTIATIONANDCONFLICTREPORT NAMEOFPROJECT PPMP20011 Projects Negotiation and Conflict Report 1PROGRAMINFORMATION Program Name:Queensland Health Payroll Program Date:05-04-2018 Project Ownership:Queensland government, Australia Prepared by:<<name of the student>>, Project Manager Distribution List: NameProject Designation Chris Jones, CFOProject Investor Louis Jackson, CEOProject Client ENTERYOURNAMEWITHSTUDENTIDPAGE1
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
PROJECTSNEGOTIATIONANDCONFLICTREPORT NAMEOFPROJECT 2THEPROJECTS 2.1Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system The project characteristics of project 1 are NCTP The justifications for these characteristics are novelty, technology, complexity, and pace. The development of Queensland payroll system would involve the use of the technology advancement along with principles of project management. The NCTP analysis of the project 1 had helped in identifying the project to be High tech, System, Platform, and Competitive. 2.2Project 2: Governance and decision-making The project characteristics of project 2 are Organizational learning process perspective. The justifications for these characteristics are given below known and chaotic. The project 2 results in forming the evitable process of governing a project and effective decision making process. The project 2 is marked for being chaotic as taking of decision is always problematic. 2.3Project 3:People and change The project characteristics of project 3 are Organizational learning process perspective. The justifications for these characteristics are complex and knowable. The project 3 is related to people and change development. However, the implication of the changes would tend to form the complexity in operations. 2.4Project 4:Funding The project characteristics of project 4 are Identity Perspective. The justifications for these characteristics are that the project 4 is related to the funding activities and the funding in the project is based on the investor involved in the project. 3THEPARTICIPANTS 3.1Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system For Project 1 the negotiating position and conflictsin relationshipsof the participants of this project are described below. 3.1.1Owner The negotiating position of the owner will be medium as the approval of the project is dependent on the owner. The potential conflictsin relationshipsthat the owner may have are operations change request, rejection of the final deliverable, and procurement changes. ENTERYOURNAMEWITHSTUDENTIDPAGE2
PROJECTSNEGOTIATIONANDCONFLICTREPORT NAMEOFPROJECT 3.1.2Designers The negotiating position of the designers will be high as the payroll system design is dependent on the designer. The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are design function issues and feasibility issue in the system. 3.1.3Contractors The negotiating position of the contractors will be low as the contractor is only required for the alignment of the external operations of the project. The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are contract violation and delay in support operations. 3.2Project 2: Governance and decision-making For Project 2 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below. 3.2.1Owner The negotiating position of the owner will be high as the owner plays a key role in the development of project governance and making key decisions of the project. The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are unacceptance in design and changes required for design. 3.2.2Designers The negotiating position of the designers will be low as decision making is not consulted with the designer. The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are forging in decision and design incompatible. 3.2.3Contractors The negotiating position of the contractors will be medium as the decisions of the project are dependent on the supply from external contractors. The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are obligations, and payment issues. 3.3Project 3:People and change For Project 3 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below. 3.3.1Owner The negotiating position of the owner will be high as the owner would be responsible for the change implication in the project The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are alteration in project objectives, person attrition, and change deployment issues. 3.3.2Designers The negotiating position of the designers will be low as they are required only for design development and operations. The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are complexity in design and denial of acceptance. ENTERYOURNAMEWITHSTUDENTIDPAGE3
PROJECTSNEGOTIATIONANDCONFLICTREPORT NAMEOFPROJECT 3.3.3Contractors The negotiating position of the contractors will low as they do not play a role for managing the people or changes in project. The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are rejection of association and issues in communication deliverable. 3.4Project 4:Funding For Project 4 the negotiating position and conflicts in relationships of the participants of this project are described below. 3.4.1Owner The negotiating position of the owner will be high as the owner is in charge of the funding operations for the project. The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are funding rejection, unable to access funds, and shortage of payment. 3.4.2Designers The negotiating position of the designers will be low as funding does not depend on the designer. The potential conflicts in relationships that the designers may have are not feasible design development and payment issues. 3.4.3Contractors The negotiating position of the contractors will be medium as funding would have to consider the supplied material costs by the contractor. The potential conflicts in relationships that the contractors may have are undesired quality of material and price hike of materials. 4THENEGOTIATIONINTERACTIONPROCESS 4.1Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system For Project 1 the negotiating position recommended should be structural approach in nature. 4.2Project 2: Governance and decision-making For Project 2 the negotiating position recommended should be strategic approach in nature 4.3Project 3:People and change For Project 3 the negotiating position recommended should be behavioural approach in nature. 4.4Project 4:Funding For Project 4 the negotiating position recommended should be integrative approach in nature. ENTERYOURNAMEWITHSTUDENTIDPAGE4
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
PROJECTSNEGOTIATIONANDCONFLICTREPORT NAMEOFPROJECT 5THENEGOTIATIONMETHODS 5.1Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system For Project 1 the negotiating method recommended should be Staged Negotiation. 5.2Project 2: Governance and decision-making For Project 2 the negotiating method recommended should be Integrative Negotiation. 5.3Project 3:People and change For Project 3 the negotiating method recommended should be Integrated Negotiation. 5.4Project 4:Funding For Project 4 the negotiating method recommended should be Fixed Pie negotiation. 6THEOUTCOME 6.1Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 1 is 2A Design and Construct 6.2Project 2: Governance and decision-making The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 2 is 5 Framework Agreements 6.3Project 3:People and change The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 3 is 2D Consortia and Joint Venture 6.4Project 4:Funding The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 4 is 2C Management Contracting ENTERYOURNAMEWITHSTUDENTIDPAGE5
PROJECTSNEGOTIATIONANDCONFLICTREPORT NAMEOFPROJECT 7BIBLIOGRAPHY Dorochoff, N. (2016).Negotiation Basics for Cultural Resource Managers. Routledge. 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. Raby, R. (2018). Using the International Negotiation Modules Project (INMP) to Build a Learning Community. InStudent 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. 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. ENTERYOURNAMEWITHSTUDENTIDPAGE6