Principle Negotiation Process Between a Practice and a Former Healthcare Provider

Case Study: Principle Negotiation Process
Name
Institution
Course
Instructor
Date
Case Study: Principle Negotiation Process
Separating the parties from the issue, focusing on interests rather than positions, creating possibilities for mutual benefit, and insisting on adopting objective standards are the foundations of the process of principled negotiation (Zhang & Constantinovits, 2018). In the following essay, a negotiation involving a healthcare practice and a former healthcare provider is analyzed. The Practice’s position is to adjust small balance write-offs, specifically those under $5.00, as automatic write-offs, while the former healthcare provider had concerns about the influence of such policy on its revenue generation. Notably, the use of the principles negotiation process facilitated the progress of a negotiation between a practice and a former healthcare provider.
Four Points of Principled Negotiations
When conducting the negotiations with a former healthcare provider, it was essential to follow the four points of principle negotiations. It was crucial to first remove the individuals from the issue as the first step in the negotiation process (Tremblay, 2016). To this purpose, the issue of small balance write-offs was clearly distinguished from the providers as a whole in the problem description. It was acknowledged the issue was not personal, but rather a financial one. Second, there was a focus on interest as opposed to positions during the negotiations (Hak & Sanders, 2018). To this end, the underlying interests that motivated the practice’s position on small balance write-offs, specifically the cost of sending patient statements were emphasized. Data and evidence that supported the practice’s position were used to demonstrate that its interest was in reducing expenses.
Third, options that allowed both the practice and the former healthcare provider to experience mutual gain were invented during the negotiations. To this end, alternative solutions such as reducing the threshold for small balance write-offs or instituting a policy for patients to opt out of receiving statements for small balances were suggested during the negotiations. The introduction of alternatives demonstrated that the sides were prepared to reach a compromise and cooperate to achieve a solution that satisfies the requirements of the practice and the provider (Tremblay, 2016). Fourth, the parties agreed on the use of objective criteria during the negotiations (Hak & Sanders, 2018). To this end, both parties agreed to use financial data and cost analysis to evaluate potential solutions and make a decision.
Negotiating Parties’ Interests
The interests of the former healthcare providers in the negotiations were maintaining revenues and adherence to established protocols. The provider may be concerned that the automatic write-offs of small balances w...