If the teachers union make a decision to change their strategy from interlinking to distributive, then this will indicate the fact that they can’t be relied upon and hence the negotiation agreement may not really be effectual anymore. The major reason behind why the commitment was made was my belief that the endowment effect of $1.5 million surplus will facilitate the teacher’s union team to make concessions and also to help them to interact with each other. In addition, as the commitment was made near the closing date, hence this made the teachers union team to compromise on some of the issues.
What I learnt in this regard is that whether an interlinking or integrative negotiation approach is personalized, dissimilar kind of structure can demonstrate the underlying purpose of a team. According to Walton and McKersie (1965), diverse kinds of frames can create disagreements. However, the disagreements can be resolved, if and only if both teams agree to align their respective frames with each other. If the negotiation is an interlinking negotiation, then it would be inappropriate for the concerned parties to adapt the distributive negotiation strategy. In an interlinking negotiation, if a team decides to adapt a rigid approach, than the there may be a loss of trust and confidence of the other party because the strategy is basically a part of the distributive strategy. In addition, as it is not really difficult for the concerned teams to identify the strategy, hence this approach can create an extremely negative impact on the overall outcome of the negotiation process. Hence, if I have to start a negotiation process, first I will chose a particular style of negotiation and after that I would prefer to continue the negotiation process with the same style of negotiation which I adapted earlier on. Another vivid thing in this agreement is that if a commitment is made earlier than the cut-off date of the negotiation, then instead of compromising the objectives of the negotiation, the concerned parties would prefer to compromise their own objectives. This helps them to successfully and effectively accomplish the objectives of the negotiation agreement (Ury, 1991).