Friction and nuances of value occur because one or both parties feel unfairly treated. This risk is greatest if there are many unknowns about what will happen after the contract is signed. In Stage 3, the parties agree to abide by six guiding principles that contractually prohibit opportunistic tit-for-act movements. After laying the groundwork for the relationship in the first three steps, the parties develop the terms of the “deal” – p.B. responsibilities, prices and metrics. It is essential that all conditions of the formal contract are in accordance with the guiding principles. With the right mindset, the development of the treaty becomes a common problem-solving exercise, not adversarial competition. To maintain expectations in a complex and changing environment, both parties – not just those with more power – must explain their vision and relationship goals. In 2008, Oliver and economics theorist John Moore revised his work on contracts. They understood that an equally important problem is nuance, retaliatory behaviour in which a party ceases to cooperate, ceases to be proactive, or makes opposing movements. The shadow occurs when one party does not get the result it expected from the agreement and feels that it is the fault of the other party or that it has not acted reasonably to mitigate the losses. The aggrieved party often reduces performance in a subtle way, sometimes even unconsciously, to compensate. The primary objective of Stage 1 is to build a partnership mentality.
Both parties must consciously strive to create an environment of trust, an environment in which they pursue their overall objectives, objectives and concerns in a transparent manner. And if their previous contracting process has led to mistrust and a vicious circle of nuance, they should think about how and why this happened. “We were no longer just interested in developing a contract,” recalled Jean Maskey, a South Island hospital employee who led the contract team, “but building excellent multi-level relationships that would allow us all to be Canada`s health leaders, whether as administrators or hospitals.” Unfortunately, this story is not unique. Companies understand that their suppliers are important partners in reducing costs, improving quality and promoting innovation, and executives regularly talk about the need for strategic relationships with common objectives and risks. But when contract negotiations begin, they are bent with contradictory logic and a transactional approach to the contract. They torment themselves on any scenario imaginable, and then try to put everything in black and white. A large number of contractual clauses, such as . B “convenience termination,” which gives a party full freedom to terminate the contract after a certain period of time – are used to try to gain the upper hand.