1 / 19

Interest-Based Problem Solving for Medically Underserved Populations Designation Negotiation

This presentation by the Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service outlines interest-based problem-solving methods crucial for designating Medically Underserved Populations (MUP) and Health Professions Shortage Areas (HPSA). Emphasizing respect for all parties' interests, the approach promotes collaborative solutions and durable outcomes. Key techniques include brainstorming, active listening, and consensus decision-making, focused on achieving mutually beneficial results. The process encourages full disclosure, objective criteria, and expanded dialogue to create feasible, acceptable solutions.

tala
Download Presentation

Interest-Based Problem Solving for Medically Underserved Populations Designation Negotiation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Health Resources and Services Administration Designation of Medically Underserved Populations and Health Professions Shortage Areas Negotiated Rulemaking 2010 Interest-Based Problem Solving Presentation by Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service

  2. Assumptions/Beliefs • All parties have a right to exist • All parties have legitimate interests • Negotiation can enhance relationship • Solutions are more durable • Mutual gain is possible

  3. Assumptions/Beliefs • Help each other achieve positive results • Full disclosure of information is useful • Rely on criteria, not power • Expand dialog with constituency

  4. Principles • Focus on issues • Focus on underlying interests • Focus on mutual interests • Judge options with objective criteria, not power • Share Information

  5. Steps: The Interest-Based Problem Solving Cycle • Select and focus the issue • Discuss and list interests • Generate options • Establish criteria • Apply the criteria to the options • Develop the solution • Reduce the solution to writing

  6. Techniques • Brainstorming • Consensus decision making • Active Listening • Feedback • Member Facilitating • Open Minded

  7. CONSENSUS DECISION MAKING DEFINITION:A decision which all members of a group can agree upon. The decision may not be everyone’s first choice, but they have heard it and everyone can live with it. PROCESS:The group must agree to work together until they find a solution that doesn’t compromise strong convictions or needs. 7

  8. WHY CONSENSUS DECISION MAKING? BUILDS GROUP UNITY MAXIMIZES GROUP INPUT ACHIEVES COMMITMENT & SATISFACTION IMPROVES RELATIONSHIPS 8

  9. A Working Definition of Consensus 70% COMFORTABLE 100% COMMITTED 9

  10. Interest-Based Terms • Issue = • Topic or subject of discussion • Problem to solve • What types of Population Groups should be considered for designation as MUP/HPSA • How should the committee assess the potential impact of revised MUP/HPSA methodologies

  11. Interest-BasedTerms • Issue • Interest = a concern or need behind an issue Why you care about an the issue Ex: Why would we care about what types of Population Groups should be considered for designation as MUP/HPSA

  12. Interest-BasedTerms • Issue • Interest • Option = Possible solution that satisfies interests

  13. Interest-Based Terms • Issue • Interest • Option • Position = one party’s viewpoint to solving the problem

  14. Interest-Based Terms • Issue • Interest • Option • Position • Criteria = objective standards to compare / judge options

  15. 3 Stage Factor Analysis • Stage 1: The Feasibility Factor • Stage 2: The Benefit Factor • Stage 3: The Acceptability Factor

  16. 3 Stage Factor Analysis • Stage 1: • The Feasibility Factor • Is the option capable of being done or carried out?

  17. 3 Stage Factor Analysis • Stage 2: • The Benefit Factor • Does the option satisfy important interests? • or • Does the option harm any important interests?

  18. 3 Stage Factor Analysis • Stage 3: • The Acceptability Factor • Will the option be received favorably by the constituents of all parties? • If not, • Can it be modified to make it acceptable?

  19. What If We Can’t Reach Agreement? WATNA Worst Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement

More Related