Jacques Rojot

Justice at Work: An International Comparison

National systems of workplace justice contain bodies of principles that set out the obligations of employees, the behaviors that violate those obligations, and the penalties that employers may assess for those violations. These principles establish the standards for determining just cause for discipline and termination of employment. This study is an international comparison of the laws that establish these principles and their application in practice. It finds a broad commonality but some interesting differences.

French industrial relations: a dual paradox with deep historical roots

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to clarify the dual paradox of French industrial relations. On the one hand, unions are numerically weak and bitterly divided but retain a significant influence. On the other hand, the social climate remains highly conflict-prone and marked by an ideological rhetoric opposing the wealthy oppressors to the exploited masses within a relatively prosperous society. Design/methodology/approach – The paper finds a historical explanation in constant features of French society. Findings – The paper found that specific concepts of freedom and equality shaped the present organization of industrial relations. Originality/value – The paper explains the structure and organization of unions and labor relations through societal elements structured historically.

Corporate Social Responsibility and Culture

In this chapter, the aim is to underline important issues and consequences when considering the concept of social responsibility for a business. Most of the questions and issues involving corporate social responsibility are complex problems that include dilemmas with contradictory aspects. Thus, corporate social responsibility requires deep changes in the way of doing business in order to integrate an ethical and socially responsible dimension at the level of management and employees and at all levels of responsibilities whether internal or external. It requires a change of culture. Culture provides the distinctive edge (Goldman and Rojot, Negotiation. Kluwer Law International, 2003).When talking about culture, we talk of at least three levels: national, occupational and organizational. The focus here is specifically on the level of the organization, often the enterprise. There are several problems such as cultural differences, cultural changes over time and others which are mainly related to the concept of culture. One way of handling these multiple problems would be to adopt a different view of culture, considering it as shared limitations on rationality (Rojot, The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Decision Making. Oxford University Press, 2008; Chanut and Rojot, Comportement organisationnel. Tome III De Boek, 2009).

The Tasks in Negotiating

We are now, in the final step of our analysis, going to deal with the most practical and pragmatic aspect of negotiating. Balance of power, analysis of the environment, strategy, tactics, style, the management of stages finally have to be expressed, converted into behavioural attitudes. This chapter will deal with actual behaviour at the bargaining table. The multiple aspects of behaviour involved in negotiating involve the following:1 establishing social contact sustaining relationships communicating listening (a little-practised part of communication) persuading understanding signalling reading signals controlling retaining flexibility building a climate responding to a climate providing stimuli

The Parties, the Environment and Bargaining Power

This chapter is devoted to building upon the elements outlined in Chapter 1. In other words, it draws the practical conclusions to be inferred from the prevalence of conflictual situations and from bounded rationality as they are seen to apply to a negotiating situation.

Determinants of the Choice of a Negotiating Strategy

This chapter assembles a series of elements which are going to be the building blocks out of which strategy can be erected and tactics selected.

The Selection of a Strategy

The formulation of a negotiating strategy is in practice an important task and it is necessary that a party be aware of its role and process and undertake it prior to entering the third stage of negotiation, marked by the interaction of the individual negotiators for each party, who then will enter into contact with each other. It belongs therefore to the second step, the process. In this chapter we will examine the elements to be considered to complete the choice of a strategy among several options, resulting from the combination of the determinants discussed above.

The Phases of Negotiation

Ann Douglas1 was among the first to derive from her own observations and from data obtained from the United States Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service a three stage model of negotiation based on labour relations’ mediated sessions of bargaining. It consisted of: (a) establishing the negotiating range; (b) reconnoitring the negotiating range; (c) precipitating the decision-making crisis. Speculations, experimental studies, and observations by many social psychologists confirmed the principle of the negotiation moving into ’stages’ which are clearly identifiable and often relatively similar in many cases. However, the number of phases which have been identified varies. For instance, Zartman2 establishes a two-stage model with the first stage concerned with developing a general formula for agreement and the second one dealing with details of implementation. Warr3 applies to labour negotiations a more general model of group activity including four stages: (a) getting organised; (b) breaking up; (c) accepting a common goal; (d) finding a solution. Druckman’s work4 results in a six-stage model with the following phases: (a) agreement about the need to negotiate; (b) agreement on a set of principles and objectives; (c) agreement on certain rules of conduct (it should be noted that the two precedent phases combined are identical to the negotiation on the rules discussed above); (d) defining the issues and setting up an agenda; (e) agreement on a formula or in principle; (f) agreement on implementing details.