Zalada Crisis
THE ZALADA CRISIS
During the first part of Zalada crisis role play, Zalada’s pre-negotiation planning was influenced by contextual factors related to bilateral negotiations (structure) and team dynamics. Zalada’s team anticipated a low context interaction with equal stakes from both sides to formulate a collaborative negotiation strategy to resolve the dispute without further escalation. There were two role identities for each member of the team viz. individual role and collective team identity where all members were dependent on each other to achieve best possible solution meeting individual as well collective goals.
The membership analysis provides an insight into the diverse nature of each individual in the team. Col Miller represented the elite police force and other civilian members were skeptical of how PSP handled the whole incident. Col Miller enjoyed close support of President’s Chief of Staff (Aide) while other civilian members exerted their respective expert power. In the organizational context, Zalada’s team had considerable freedom given by President’s mandate to formulate suitable strategy in the best national interest of Zalada.
During the planning phase, Zalada’s team shared ideas freely and apprised others of their concerns and identify possible solutions. Deputy Minister for Justice kept the team focused on the overall goal of forming a collective viewpoint to deal with the situation at hand. Col Miller and President’s Aide provided much needed information about what actually happened during the incident and how President wanted to resolve the dispute with Colonia. The team exchanged ideas both informally and in a formal setting to formulate a cohesive negotiation strategy. PSP actions were brought under close scrutiny from legal standpoint, which made a few members angry how Col Miller’s people brought the situation out of proportion. Notwithstanding majority concern on how PSP handled the situation, members were respectful and accommodated
During the first part of Zalada crisis role play, Zalada’s pre-negotiation planning was influenced by contextual factors related to bilateral negotiations (structure) and team dynamics. Zalada’s team anticipated a low context interaction with equal stakes from both sides to formulate a collaborative negotiation strategy to resolve the dispute without further escalation. There were two role identities for each member of the team viz. individual role and collective team identity where all members were dependent on each other to achieve best possible solution meeting individual as well collective goals.
The membership analysis provides an insight into the diverse nature of each individual in the team. Col Miller represented the elite police force and other civilian members were skeptical of how PSP handled the whole incident. Col Miller enjoyed close support of President’s Chief of Staff (Aide) while other civilian members exerted their respective expert power. In the organizational context, Zalada’s team had considerable freedom given by President’s mandate to formulate suitable strategy in the best national interest of Zalada.
During the planning phase, Zalada’s team shared ideas freely and apprised others of their concerns and identify possible solutions. Deputy Minister for Justice kept the team focused on the overall goal of forming a collective viewpoint to deal with the situation at hand. Col Miller and President’s Aide provided much needed information about what actually happened during the incident and how President wanted to resolve the dispute with Colonia. The team exchanged ideas both informally and in a formal setting to formulate a cohesive negotiation strategy. PSP actions were brought under close scrutiny from legal standpoint, which made a few members angry how Col Miller’s people brought the situation out of proportion. Notwithstanding majority concern on how PSP handled the situation, members were respectful and accommodated