Learning Exercise: Withholding Information Case
Sonia Y. Quiles
PPA605: Negotiation, Bargaining & Conflict Management
Instructor: AJene Maxwell
November 11, 2013

Abstract
Parties involved in negotiation tend to use various tactics to derail direction of negotiation process. Negotiation involves two parties that are seeking to reach an agreement. In most either party tend to use tactics for their own interest. One of these tactics is withholding information. In withholding information they tend to believe they have the upper hand. It is a silent attempt to move the negotiation to their favor. The case of “withholding information” involves an employer who has decided to become self-insured but, failed to inform his employees. The previous insurance company has agreed to become a third-party administrator, so any changes would not be apparent to the employees. The employees unaware of already established agreement between employer and previous insurance company expressed their suggestion on employer becoming self-employed so their benefits could stay the same. Unfortunately, the employer has now been presented with a new concern on whether to inform the employees of actual changes already in place or withholding information regardless of the outcome of the negotiation. The mutual end the parties want to reach is a contract. The employer wants an affordable contract, and the employees want a contract that maximizes wages and benefits. This paper will evaluate the ethics of withholding information and how it affects the outcome of a negotiation. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how people use the withholding information tactics and their expectations on the outcome.

Ethical Systems
Ethical systems are the basic morals that define your life and the life of those you are surrounded by, usually your family, friends and community. Usually they are morals that are shared by a group of people with different ideas about what is right and what is wrong. Ethics is the study of morality focused on moral judgments and principles of conduct. Our ethical belief system is the basis for the values we develop. Our values are influenced by the cultural setting in which we live and by those with whom we associate. There are three types of ethical systems that may be used by involved parties while negotiating; ethics of purpose, ethics of principle and ethics of consequences. These three ethical theories have been used to describe alternate views of human nature. Ethic of purpose is an ethical theory developed by Aristotle, a Greek philosopher (Carrell & Heavrin, 2008). According to Aristotle’s theory, human beings are naturally good and ultimately always try to achieve a truly good ending result. He believed that no matter what the action was, a human being would use positive means in a negotiation process to ensure fairness and justice when reaching an agreement. Ethics of principle is an ethical theory developed by Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher (Carrell & Heavrin, 2008). Kant believed that people would recognize they should treat other how they wished to be treated. According to Kant, human beings are inherently rational and will do what is right. He supported the classic rule “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Negotiators using this principle will implement tactics that are rational. Ethics of consequences was developed by John Stuart Mill, an English philosopher (Carrell & Heavrin, 2008). Mill believed that one can only judge the moral value of an action by its results. Mill supported the theory that “the end justifies the means”. Negotiators using this ethic will implement actions that will result is positive outcomes for the parties involved.
Fairness
Fairness is known to underlie negotiations because negotiating is a voluntary endeavor. There are various principles that are used by negotiators in a