Critically analyse how cognitive biases impacted your approach to the group negotiation activity.

Provide a detailed analysis of the interplay of content, process and relationship

Newtown University I Management Script

COMMON INFORMATION

Newtown University (NU), founded in 1985, is located on the outskirts of an Australian city. A campus university, NU has built a formidable reputation for innovative teaching, world-class research, and an ability to attract high-quality staff. NU currently employs 2,070 staff and has 30,360 enrolled students. The first students were enrolled in February 1987, with the first graduations occurring in March 1990. Like many universities, NU has faced considerable financial challenges over the last three years, as a result of reduced numbers of international students, delayed government-financed research funding, and short-term increased costs associated with voluntary and compulsory redundancies. A substantial building program to rejuvenate and replace some of the original buildings is now facing major cost increases. Despite the University's sound academic reputation, previously well-regarded fiscal management, and extensive community engagement, there has been a strained relationship between the University's management and the Universities Employees' Union (UEU) for more than a decade, as a result of the previous Vice-Chancellor's (VC) autocratic style. The current VC, and her senior leadership team (SLT), have worked hard to bring about a change in leadership culture, and promote a perception of fairness, equity, and authenticity. As an example, many casual staff were recently contacted by HR, and advised that they had been underpaid over several years, and the back payments were paid promptly, with interest. NU recently launched its 5-5-15-75 Strategy known as 3FSS, aiming, within five years, to be in the top five universities in Australia, in the top 15 in the Pacific Rim and in the top 75 in the world. Whilst this is an ambitious set of goals, the VC and the SLT, with the support of the Senate (NU's governing body), believe that with committed staff support, increased research funding, a recovery in international student enrolments, and the attraction of additional 'star' academics from the UK and the USA, all elements of the strategy are achievable. They further believe that it is vital in maintaining NU's independence - the VC of Metropolitan University (MU) is known to have secretly lobbied government to merge the two universities, arguing that MU, as the older institution, should absorb NU. A key element of his argument to government is economies of scale. A merged institution would be more than double the size of NU and would provide opportunities for some faculties to merge and others to be dissolved. MU's finances have not been hit as hard as those of NU. The Enterprise Agreement (EA) is the agreement between NU and its staff, that governs pay and conditions and is due for renegotiation

YOUR TEAM

You are the negotiating team for NU. You will be negotiating with representatives from the UEU to come to an agreement on the new EA. Team members:

DVC/Director of HR (reports to VC, and leads HR function)

Deputy CFO (reports to CFO and manages FP&A function and financial control function)

Head of Remuneration and Benefits (reports to Director of HR and leads Rem & Bens team)

If you have a fourth team member: o Senior HR Business Partner (reports to Director of HR and manages faculty HR managers) You will be negotiating with:

President of the NU Branch of the UEU (Associate Professor in the Faculty of Arts)

Branch Secretary of the NU Branch of the UEU (Lecturer in the Faculty of Science)

UEU member (Casual Lecturer in the Faculty of Economics, Business and Social Sciences)

If they have a fourth team member: o UEU member (Faculty Administration Manager in the Faculty of Law)

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION FOR MANAGEMENT TEAM

Following a long discussion process, involving the VC, the SLT, with contributions from HR, Finance, and the offices of various DVCs, and including discussions with outside experts, you have been instructed that there are a number of key points the VC and SLT are very keen to see achieved in the new EA:

1. A maximum 2.25% pay rise per year for the next three years (the next EA will be negotiated in late 2025, to take effect in 2026). If the UEU agrees to this, the pay rise will be backdated to 1 September 2022. The UEU is not aware of the percentage to be offered, and you know that they will be seeking much higher figures.

2. A working week of 40 hours for all FT staff (the current EA has a working week of 37.5 hours). This is seen as a vital productivity initiative to contribute to 3FSS and to generate overtime savings. The SLT believes that at a top university, staff should contribute as much time as they would in a top commercial organisation. The UEU is not aware of this proposal, and the 37.5 hours came about as a result of an agreement reached to reduce hours from 38 hours per week in the EA negotiations in 2010.

3. The abolition of the nine-day fortnight. This is a long-established public sector practice, whereby an employee, if they have worked 10 days' worth of hours in nine days, can take one day off without having to take annual leave. Management has long detested the practice, and has tried to abolish it numerous times, but the UEU consistently refuses to discuss the matter and will not negotiate on it. However, the VC and SLT have said that this time it must go. As a sweetener, they have advised you that you are authorised to offer an undertaking that the next round of redundancies will be postponed for at least six months. Management also believes that the system is abused, with staff being paid overtime for extra hours worked and then claiming the time off, with the knowledge and collusion of their supervisors and the junior management level within the faculties and departments. However, at this stage the evidence is restricted to hearsay and rumour. No concrete evidence has been collected, although one faculty manager has indicated that she is willing to gather evidence and present a report. This is quite serious as it could implicate many staff, supervisors and some junior managers, in what is, effectively, fraud. You are of the view that you could call the UEU's bluff and lead them to believe that you already have a report, but cannot reveal its content, as it is being reviewed by the General Counsel.

4. The introduction of a teaching-only class of academics, up to Professor level. These academics will be recruited from the sectors in which they work and will focus on teaching, without having any research responsibilities. The University believes that this initiative will enhance the teaching capabilities of the faculties, and will complement the existing faculty, by bringing a practical and practitioner-focused aspect to teaching. Whilst not a unique initiative amongst universities, the opportunity for these teaching-only academics to hold professorial titles is not supported by many traditional academics and is a contentious issue. You are aware, however, that it is a popular move amongst casual and adjunct academics, who see it as a career development opportunity, not previously available to them. As such, you know that there is disagreement amongst UEU members, 25% of whom are casual and adjunct academics. Many universities have Teaching Fellows, and some have teaching focused academics, but the Professor and Associate Professor titles are not typically open to them. Management proposes that these titles should be used, but to placate the FT academics, the titles of Teaching Professor and Associate Teaching Professor are proposed. You are aware that this has still not satisfied the traditional academics.

5. There are many staff that have worked at the University for more than 20 years, and a significant proportion of these have large amounts of accumulated annual leave and longservice leave (LSL). Accumulated annual leave and LSL have to be accrued for, and, as such, they represent a significant liability on the balance sheet. The CFO, backed by the rest of SLT wants this liability reduced substantially, and it is proposed that you ask the UEU to agree that staff will be forced to 'use it or lose it' by 30 June 2024. NU's General Counsel has advised that a precedent was set by another university some years ago, and that, if the matter went to court, NU would win. However, the VC and SLT are reluctant to go down a litigation path, which would only sour relationships with the UEU even more. They prefer a negotiated agreement and see the proposal as fair.