NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES USED BY LABOUR UNIONS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA: A CASE OF UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA PROFESSIONAL STAFF UNION.

This paper reports a study undertaken to investigate the negotiation strategies that the University of Zambia Professional Staff Union (UNZAPROSU) uses to bargain with University of Zambia (UNZA) management, the challenges encountered during the bargaining process and their possible solutions. The research employed both qualitative and quantitative methods in the collection and analysis of data. Data was collected from the Vice President, Secretary General and all the executive members of the University of Zambia Professional Staff Union by using the interview guide and the questionnaire. The study findings revealed that flinch, snow job and chicken strategies were the main negotiation strategies used by the University of Zambia Professional Staff Union during the bargaining process with management. The study recommended that, in addition to the negotiation strategies used by the union, effective strategies such as the give-and-take, brinkmanship and high ball/lowball strategies should be used in the bargaining process with management. This will enable the union to conclude the negotiations in a relatively short period of time. Further, there is need for the University of Zambia management to find alternative sources of funds

The study on negotiation strategies used by Unions at the University of Zambia was modelled on the dual-concern model of conflict resolution which is a perspective that assumes individuals' preferred method of dealing with conflict based on two themes or dimensions namely, a concern for self (Assertiveness) and a concern for others (empathy) (Shell, 2006). Based on this model, individuals balance the concern for personal needs and interest with the needs and interests of others. Shell (2006) identifies five styles or responses to negotiation process which can be used based on individuals' preferences depending on their pro-self or pro-social goals. These styles can change over time and individuals can have strong dispositions towards numerous styles. 1. Accommodating: this style involves individuals who enjoy solving other party's problems and preserving personal relationships. Accommodators are sensitive to the emotional states, body language and body signals of the other parties. They can, however, feel taken advantage of in situations when the other party places little emphasis on the relationship. 2. Avoiding: this style involves individuals who do not like to negotiate and do not even do it unless warranted.
When negotiating, avoiders tend to defer and dodge the confrontational aspects of negotiating and consequently, they may be perceived as tactful and diplomatic. 3. Collaborating: here, individuals enjoy negotiations that involve solving tough problems in creative ways.
Collaborators are good at using negotiations to understand the concerns and interests of the other parties. They can, however, create problems by transforming simple situations into complex ones. 4. Competing: this style involves individuals who enjoy negotiations because they present an opportunity to win something. Competitive negotiators have strong instincts for all aspects of negotiating and are often strategic. Because their style can dominate the bargaining process, competitive negotiators often neglect the importance of relationships. 612 5. Compromising: this style involves individuals who are eager to close the deal by doing what is fair and equal for all parties involved in the negotiation. Compromisers can be useful when there is limited time to complete the deal; however, compromisers often unnecessarily rush the negotiation process and make concessions too quickly.
It is observed that unions generally adopt one or two of the above negotiation styles in bargaining process with employers.
Negotiation Strategies:- Gregory (2009) mentions that negotiation can take a wide variety of forms, from a trained negotiator acting on behalf of a particular organisation or position in a formal setting, to an informal negotiation between friends. Negotiation can be contrasted with mediation where a neutral third party listens to each side's argument and attempts to help craft an agreement between the parties. It can also be compared with arbitration which resembles a legal proceeding. In arbitration, both sides make an argument as to the merits of their case and the arbitrator decides the outcome. This negotiation is sometimes referred to as positional or hard-bargaining negotiation.
Negotiation theorists who include Gregory (2009) and Minton et al (2001) generally have identified two major strategies which negotiators use in the bargaining process and these are Distributive negotiation and Integrative negotiation.
Distributive negotiation is also sometimes called positional or hard bargaining negotiation. It tends to approach negotiation on the model of haggling in a market. In this strategy, each side often adopts an extreme position, knowing too well that it will not be accepted and then employs a combination of guile, bluffing and brinkmanship in order to cede as little as possible before reaching a deal. Distributive bargainers conceive negotiations as a process of distributing a fixed amount of value (Gregory, 2009).
The term distributive implies that there is a finite amount of something being distributed or divided among the people involved. Sometimes this type of negotiation is referred to as the distribution of a "fixed pie". There is only so much to go round, but the proportion to be distributed is variable. Distributive negotiation is also sometimes called win-lose because of the assumption that one person's gain results in another person's loss. This strategy often involves people who have never had a previous interactive relationship, nor are they likely to do so again in the near future (Minton, 2001).
Integrative negotiation is also sometimes referred to as interest-based or principled negotiation. It is a set of techniques that attempts to improve the quality and likelihood of negotiated agreement by providing an alternative to traditional distributive negotiation techniques. While distributive negotiation assumes that there is a fixed amount of value to be divided between the parties, integrative negotiation often attempts to create value in the course of the negotiation. It focuses on the underlying interests of the parties rather than their arbitrary starting positions, approaches negotiation as a shared problem rather than a personalised battle, and insists upon adherence to objective, principled criteria as the basis for agreement. Integrative negotiation often involves a higher degree of trust and the forming of relationships. It can also involve creative problem-solving that aims to achieve mutual gains. Therefore, it is also called win-win negotiation (Gregory, 2009).

Strategies used in negotiation:-
Strategies are always an important part of the negotiating process. Strategies are more effective in the negotiation process when used correctly taking into consideration the prevailing situation. More often than not, strategies are subtle, difficult to identify and used for multiple purposes. Strategies are more frequently used in distributive negotiations and the focus is to take as much value off the are gasping for air, or a visible expression of surprise or shock. The flinch can be done consciously or unconsciously. The flinch sends a signal to the opposite party to think that the offer or proposal is absurd hoping that the other party will lower their aspirations. This strategy is premised on the fact that seeing a physical reaction is more believable than hearing someone saying, "I am shocked". 5. Good Guy/Bad Guy: The good guy/bad guy approach is typically used in team negotiations where one member of the team makes extreme or unreasonable demands, and the others offer a more rational demand. This tactic is named after a police interrogation technique often portrayed in the media. The good guy will appear more reasonable and understanding and therefore, easier to work with. In essence, it is using the law of relativity to attract cooperation. The good guy will appear more agreeable relative to the bad guy. This strategy is easy to spot because of its frequent use. 6. High ball/low ball: This is where, depending on whether selling or buying, sellers or buyers use a ridiculously high or ridiculously low opening offer that cannot be achieved. The theory is that the extreme offer will cause the other party to re-evaluate his or her opening offer and move close to the resistance point (Minton 2001). The other feature of this tactic is that the person giving extreme demands appears more flexible to make concessions towards a more reasonable outcome. The only disadvantage of this method is that the opposite party may think negotiating is a waste of time. 7. Nibble: Nibbling is asking for proportionally small concessions that have not been discussed previously just before closing the deal. This tactic takes advantage of the other party's desire to close by adding "just one more thing". 8. Snow Job: Here, negotiators overwhelm the other party with so much information that he or she has difficulty determining which facts are important, and which facts are diversions. Negotiators may also use technical language or jargon to mask a simple answer to a question asked by a non-expert.
The strategies discussed above are employed by many negotiators including Trade Unions to negotiate successfully for better conditions of service for their members in different workplaces or organisations.

Methodology:-
Research Design:-Orodho (2003) defines research design as a guide to the researcher in collecting, analyzing and interpreting observed facts. In the same vein, Gerring (2005:131) defines a case study as a research strategy, an empirical inquiry aimed at investigating a phenomenon within its natural context. An important characteristic of a case study is that it uses multiple data-gathering techniques to study a single phenomenon.
This study used a Case Study design. This was because the study involved collecting information from a relatively smaller number of cases using questionnaires and interview guide. Because of the smaller number of cases, a Case Study generally involved some qualitative analysis.
Within this design, both qualitative and quantitative methods were integrated in order to allow the researcher to triangulate the data that was collected. This is supported by Cohen et al (1994) who intimate that the use of both qualitative and quantitative approaches in research enables the researcher to cross check research findings. It is envisaged that a combination of these research designs helps to explain fully the richness and the complexity of a given phenomenon by studying it from more than one viewpoint.

Population:-
The term population refers to a particular set of items, objects, phenomena, or people being analyzed. Similarly, Nachmias and Nachmias (1981) define population as the aggregate of all cases that conform to some designate set of specifications while a sample is defined as a subset of the entire population.

614
The population of this study included all executive members of the University of Zambia Professional Staff Union (UNZAPROSU) who were directly involved in the bargaining process with management. The views of the executive members were thus essential to the outcome of the study.
Sample and Sampling Techniques:-Sample:-According to Orodho and Kombo (2002), a sample is a subset of the entire population selected for observation and analysis. This is in support of Merriam and Simpson (1984) who define a sample as a strategically and systematically identified group of people or events that meet the criteria of representativeness for a particular study.
The sample population for this study was 11 respondents who were all members of the executive Committee of UNZAPROSU. The sample comprised the President of the Union, the Vice President, General Secretary, Treasurer and his vice, trustees and all other members of the Committee.

Sampling technique:-
Sampling is a procedure that a researcher uses to gather people, places or things to study (people in this study). Davis (1980) defines sampling as the way of selecting the units in different areas.
In order to select the sample, purposive sampling technique was employed. This was because all the executive members of the union were a rich source of information for the study. Saunders (2003) defines purposive sampling as a non-probability sampling technique in which the researcher's judgement is used to choose some appropriate characteristics required of the sample members. Therefore, all the eleven (11) respondents were selected purposively.

Research Instruments:-Semi-structured Questionnaire:-
The study used a semi-structured questionnaire and interview guide to collect data. The closed and open ended questions in a semi-structured questionnaire enabled gathering of both quantitative and qualitative data. Burns (2000) describes a questionnaire as a written document comprising questions seeking answers on a particular subject. It may also comprise other prompts for the purpose of gathering in-depth information from the respondents.

Data Collection Procedure:-
Data collection refers to the process of finding information for the research problem. It may involve conducting an interview, administering a questionnaire or conducting a focused group discussion or observing what is going on among the subjects of the study (Burns, 2000). Different studies demand different ways of entering the field in order to gather data. In this study, the researchers made an appointment to interview the UNZAPROSU Vice President and the Secretary General in their offices. When the time came, they were interviewed individually to gather in-depth information about the negotiation strategies they used in the bargaining process with management.
The researchers approached and administered questionnaires to the other members of the executive committee of UNZAPROSU. The members were approached individually in their respective departments at the University of Zambia. The respondents were given one to two days to respond to the questions raised in the questionnaire.
Data Analysis:-Data analysis entails categorizing, summarizing and ordering data sets and describing them in meaningful terms. There are many data analysis methods that are used in research. Currently, research studies generally use either narrative or statistical strategies or both. However, the type of data analysis method used is heavily dependent on the research design and the method by which the data is collected or measured (Moore and McCabee, 1989).
Cohen et al (1994) state that qualitative data analysis is a four step process that involves; identifying the main themes, assigning codes to these themes, classifying responses under the main themes and integrating themes and responses into the text of the report. Themes are patterns across data sets that are important to the description of a phenomenon and are associated with a specific research question. The themes become the categories for analysis (Saldana, 2009). Therefore, in this study, qualitative data was analyzed by coding and classifying the themes that emerge from the responses. With regard to data collected quantitatively, its analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). SPSS is a software package used for statistical analysis in social sciences. To 615 use this package, the quantitative data, in form of numeric variables, is entered and computed accordingly to produce percentages.

Ethical consideration:-
Ethics are a set of standards that guide researchers on how they should interact with the researched and how research problems could be conceived and formulated. The standards include how data-gathering instruments are constructed and how data is collected, analysed and interpreted, and how reports could be written and findings disseminated in ways that are sensitive and inclusive of the values and realities of the researched (Chilisa and Preece, 2005).
Cooper and Schindler (1997) explain that research ethics are norms and standards of behaviour that guide moral choices about our behaviour and our relationships with others. Furthermore, research demands ethical behaviour from its participants. In general, research must be designed so that a respondent does not suffer physical harm, discomfort, pain, embarrassment or loss of privacy. Before undertaking this study, consent was sought from all participants that took part in the research. This consent was sought in person from the respondents on their willingness to take part in the study. It was made clear to the participants that the information provided would be used to write a research paper that would shed light on the use of effective negotiation strategies to reach collective agreements in the shortest possible time. Respondents were not asked to reveal their names and their participation was voluntary. They were at liberty to withdraw from the research at any time when need arose.
Thus, ethical issues are concerned with privacy, confidentiality, harm, deception and informed consent. Before conducting the study, the researched were provided with information about the study, its purpose, how it would be carried out, its duration and benefits to the participants Findings:-This section presents the findings of the study on negotiation strategies used by UNZAPROSU during the bargaining process with UNZA management.

Findings from Executive members and trustees:-
The total number of respondents presented in this section is 09.
This section is based on the first research question which aimed at finding out the negotiation strategies used by UNZAPROSU during the bargaining process with management and period taken to reach collective agreement. The respondents were asked to state the period taken to reach collective agreement.
It was established that seven respondents mentioned that the period taken to reach collective agreements was about six months. Two respondents stated that it took about four months to reach a collective agreement. Therefore, majority respondents stated that it took long (about six months) to reach collective agreement.
Respondents were also asked to indicate the negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with management. The responses to this question were as follows: Nibble Strategy:-Seven respondents indicated that Nibble strategy was not used in the bargaining process. Two respondents stated that Nibble strategy was used in the bargaining process with management. Therefore, majority respondents stated that Nibble strategy was not used by the union executive during the bargaining process with UNZA management.

Snow Job
Eight respondents indicated that Snow Job strategy was used by the union during the bargaining process with management. One respondent mentioned that Snow Job strategy was not used by the union to bargain with management. Therefore, this study established that Snow Job strategy was used by the union to bargain with management.
Flinch Strategy:-Six respondents stated that Flinch strategy was used by the union during the bargaining process with management while three respondents said they had not used this strategy. Therefore, it was established that Flinch strategy was used by the union to bargain with management.

616
Chicken Strategy:-The study revealed that eight respondents indicated that they had used Chicken strategy during the bargaining process with management while one respondent stated that the union had not used chicken strategy to bargain with management. This study, therefore, established that Chicken strategy was used by the union to bargain with management.
Deadline Strategy:-It was noted that five respondents indicated that Deadline strategy was not used during the bargaining process with management. Four respondentssaid that the union had used Deadline strategy to bargain with management. This study concluded that Deadline strategy was not used to bargain with management.
Brinkmanship Strategy:-Five respondents indicated that Brinkmanship strategy was not used by the union to bargain with management. On the other hand, four respondents stated that Brinkmanship strategy was used by the union in the bargaining process with management. Therefore, this study established that Brinkmanship strategy was not used during the bargaining process with management.

High Ball/Low Ball Strategy:-
The findings show that five respondents stated that High Ball/Low Ball strategy was not used by the union to bargain with management while four respondents indicated that this strategy was used. Therefore, majority respondents mentioned that High Ball/Low Ball strategy was not used at all by the union in the bargaining process with management.
The participants were further asked to state the effectiveness of the strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with UNZA management. In this study, effectiveness of the negotiation strategies was measured by the time taken to conclude the negotiations with management. The strategies that took long to reach an agreement were considered to be ineffective as compared to those that took a short period of time. The responses obtained to the question above are presented below.
Seven respondents said the negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process were effective. On the contrary, two respondents expressed the view that the negotiation strategies used were not effective.
An open ended follow-up question was asked to find out the reasons for those who indicated that the strategies used in the bargaining process were effective. The respondents felt that the strategies used were effective as they achieved the goals and objectives set before commencing the bargaining process. They stated that the strategies produced desired outcomes of win-win situation with management. On the other hand, other respondents said that the strategies employed did prolong the bargaining process because they were not effective. Some felt that the longer it took to conclude the negotiations, the less effective the strategies were, while others did not share this viewpoint. This section presents findings based on the third research question which aimed at determining the challenges encountered by the union during the bargaining process with management.
An open-ended question was asked to state the challenges encountered by the union during the bargaining process with management. Respondents stated that dialogue between management and the union was not smooth because both parties took deliberate positions to protect their interests and usually no party was willing to listen to the other. As a consequence, the bargaining process took long to end. Some respondents mentioned that it was a challenge to convince management on some issues because funding to the university by the government was not adequate. The other challenge was that the union usually received pressure from the other two unions in the institution because the unions were expected to make similar demands to management. It was also stated that management called the union for negotiations at short notice and this posed a challenge as they needed to prepare before the bargaining process. This section presents findings based on the fourth research question. It aimed at finding possible solutions to the challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management.
Respondents were asked to state, in their opinion, how the challenges mentioned above could be resolved.
Majority respondents stated that, to resolve the challenge of inadequate funding, the government of the Republic of Zambia, through the Ministry of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education, should adequately 617 fund the University of Zambia to enable it carry out its functions smoothly. Further, the respondents said that UNZA management should not divert the funds meant for workers to other activities.
In the same vein, some respondents felt that both parties should seriously put a worker at their heart and consider him to be a human being who should work under good conditions of service. Other respondents said that management should advocate for an integrative bargaining process which involves expanding the pie other than preferring the distributive bargaining approach which advocates for dividing up a fixed pie.
The respondents stated that there was need for the University of Zambia Professional Staff Union executive to be trained in unionism including how to handle the bargaining process with management. One trustee said "there is, in fact, need to train all the members about unionism to equip them to take up leadership roles in the union in the future". Further, the other respondents felt that all the workers including union leaders should have same conditions of service to avoid a situation of having workers on permanent conditions of service and others on contract. In addition, both parties should exercise a give-and-take stance towards the demands presented to the bargaining unit. The next section presents the findings from the Vice President and the Secretary General of UNZAPROSU.

Findings from the vice president and the secretary general:-
The Vice President and Secretary General of UNZAPROSU were interviewed individually on negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with University of Zambia management. Below were the findings.
Negotiation strategies used during the bargaining process with management:-When asked to mention some negotiation strategies they knew, they could not mention them by name but attempted to explain the strategies they employed during the bargaining process with management. The vice president stated that a negotiation strategy "is where a party overwhelms another party with so much information ... to make it difficult to follow and determine which facts are important and which ones are not". This strategy usually took long to reach collective agreements. He further mentioned that "the other strategy is where you indicate or show a negative physical reaction to a suggestion or proposal hoping that others will change the offer". He pointed out that the physical reaction usually sent a negative signal to the other party for them to change the offer.
On the other hand, the secretary general talked about the strategy of proposing extreme measures to force the other party to chicken out and offer them what they want. He explained that this strategy "is where one party suggests either a very high or low percentage by which the salaries, for example, may be increased. This may force the other party to chicken out and give them what they want".

Effectiveness of the negotiation strategies used:-
The vice president said that the negotiation strategies used during the bargaining process with management were effective because they usually achieved their objectives to improve the conditions of service for the membership. The secretary general mentioned that, "even if it takes long in some instances to reach an agreement, the goal of making sure that the conditions of service were improved was achieved. He said the bargaining process usually takes about two months on average to finalise and reach a collective agreement".

Challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management:-
The secretary general stated that funding to the university was so inadequate that it posed a challenge to convince management on any increments. The vice president also shared the same viewpoint. He said "whenever, management was engaged in the bargaining process, inadequate funding was used as an excuse for not increasing salaries and other conditions of service for workers". The other challenge was pointed out by the secretary general who said that " after an internal meeting, some members of the union executive committee are in the habit of secretly informing management about anything discussed in the meeting and this posed a challenge because management will have all the information to frustrate the bargaining process".
It was also a challenge for management to remain adamant on some issues. No matter how much the union tried to convince management, an agreement could not be reached and this led to several adjournments to give each other time to think about the issues and meet again. 618

Solutions to the challenges encountered during the bargaining process:-
The vice president and the secretary general of the union were of the view that the government of the Republic of Zambia should come to the aid of the institution by funding it adequately. After funding it adequately, management should not divert the funds to other activities of the institution. The vice president shared that the University of Zambia, as an institution, should find other ways of sourcing funds instead of entirely depending on the government of Zambia.
It would also help if management realised that workers were human beings who needed to work in a conducive atmosphere and with better conditions of service. The vice president stated that "when negotiating, management should not be adamant instead they should listen to the grievances of the workers and appreciate them. They are fond of trivialising issues presented to them and at times issuing threats to members of the executive committee".

Discussion:-
This section discusses the findings of the study on negotiation strategies used by the University of Zambia Professional Staff Union (UNZAPROSU) during the bargaining process with management.

Negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process:-
The first objective of the study was to identify the negotiation strategies used by UNZAPROSU during the bargaining process with management. The study established that flinch, snow job and chicken strategies were the main negotiation strategies used by the union to bargain with management. As explained by Goldman (1991) The flinch sends a signal to the opposite party to think that the offer or proposal is absurd, hoping that the other party will lower their aspirations. This strategy is premised on the fact that seeing a physical reaction is more believable than hearing someone saying, "I am shocked". The union used this strategy to bargain with management successfully to achieve its objective.
The union also used snow job strategy which, in this study, meant overwhelming the other party with so much information that they have difficulty determining which facts are important and which ones are diversions. Although the vice president and the secretary general did not name this strategy, the researchers identified it from their explanation. The union may have used technical language or jargon to mask a simple answer to a question asked by a non-expert in the management bargaining team. On the other hand, chicken strategy refers to a situation where one party proposes extreme measures to force the other party to chicken out and give them what they want (Goldman, 1991). This strategy can be dangerous when parties are not willing to back down and go through with the extreme measures. This explains why the parties took long to conclude the bargaining process because each party was not willing to back down and instead they opted to maintain their extreme prositions. Since the parties were not willing to consider a give-and-take situation, the bargaining process took a considerable period of time to reach a collective agreement. A give-and-take style involves parties who are eager to close the deal by doing what is fair and equal for all parties involved in the negotiations. This style enables the bargaining team to utilise the dual-concern model of conflict resolution which is a perspective that assumes individual's preferred strategy of dealing with conflict based on two themes namely, a concern for self (assertiveness) and a concern for others (empathy) (Shell, 2006). This style usually takes a short time to reach a collective agreement as they are determined to complete the deal as soon as possible .

Effectiveness of negotiation strategies used during the bargaining process:-
The second objective of the study was to assess the effectiveness of the negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with management. All the respondents including the vice president and secretary general stated that the negotiation strategies used during the bargaining process with management were effective because they usually achieved their objectives of getting an increment in salaries and other conditions of service to improve the welfare of their members. The study established that, although the union achieved its objectives eventually, it took long, about six months to conclude the negotiations with management. This meant that the strategies were not as effective as they were expected to be. The members got their salary increment in the second half of the year with arrears obviously subjected to depreciation of the local currency, the Zambian Kwacha and to heavy taxation.

Challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management:-
The third objective of the study was to establish the challenges encountered by the union during the bargaining process with management. From the findings of the study, it was established that the bargaining process with management was faced with a number of challenges. The respondents mentioned the following challenges: inadequate funding to the institution, lack of meaningful dialogue with management, pressure from other unions in the institution and management remaining adamant on several issues.
The respondents indicated that lack of adequate funding to the institution made it almost impossible for management to award any salary increments for workers. Management at the institution confirmed that the University of Zambia received financial resources in form of grants from the government of the Republic of Zambia. They explained that the grants were so small that they could not even manage to pay monthly salaries to the workers. This problem was compounded by the huge amounts of money that the University of Zambia owed retirees. The institution also owed some serving workers a lot of money in form of gratuities since 2010.
In order to achieve improvements in the performance of workers in executing their tasks and consequent overall organizational efficiency and effectiveness, there is need to allocate adequate and consistent finances to the increment of salaries and other conditions of service for workers at the University of Zambia.
The respondents mentioned that lack of meaningful dialogue with management was another challenge experienced during the bargaining process. They explained that both parties took deliberate positions to protect their interest. At times, there was no proper dialogue because management used intimidatory language during the bargaining process and therefore, members could not discuss issues freely.
The other challenge was that the union usually received pressure from the other two unions in the institution namely University of Zambia Lecturers and Researchers Union (UNZALARU) and University of Zambia Allied Workers Union (UNZAAWU) because the unions were expected to make similar demands to management. They explained that the pressure was as a result of other unions in the institution wanting to make the same demands to the University of Zambia Council. Whenever UNZAPROSU made high demands, there was pressure for it to reduce the demands so that all the unions in the institution could benefit equally.
It was also clear from the responses given by the respondents that management was so adamant on some issues that it could adjourn meetings several times before reaching a collective agreement. This was mostly because management took advantage of the ineffective negotiation strategies employed by the union and leakages of information made possible by some members of the union executive.

Possible Solutions to the challenges encountered during the bargaining process:-
The fourth objective of the study was to suggest possible solutions to the challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management. From the findings of the study, the respondents shared the following possible solutions to the challenges faced during the bargaining process with management. 1. The Government of the Republic of Zambia should adequately fund the institution The respondents stated that the government should seriously consider increasing funding to the University of Zambia. They explained that if the government funded the institution adequately each financial year, management would, in turn, allocate enough funds to workers' salary increments and other conditions of service. The other respondents shared that the University of Zambia, as an institution, should find other fundraising ventures. They reasoned that there was too much dependency on government grants and tuition fees from students. 2. The University of Zambia management should arrange to have meaningful dialogue with the union.
The respondents suggested that management should arrange for meaningful dialogue with the executive during the bargaining process. They added that, for dialogue to be meaningful, management should not use intimidatory language so as not to threaten executive members during negotiations. They proposed that there was need to have a neutral chairperson in the negotiation meetings to promote proper dialoguing.
3. The University of Zambia management should be informing union officials about the meetings in good time.The respondents felt that there was need on the part of management to notify the union in advance about the time, agenda and venue of the meetings. This was very important for the union to prepare and consult adequately for the meeting. They stated that there was need for the union to consult the members before making a decision to accept or reject any offers from management. Therefore, time was needed for the executive to arrange for a meeting with the members of the union. 620 4. The University of Zambia management should not remain adamant during the bargaining process with the union The respondents mentioned that management should always respect the views of the executive members during the bargaining process. They should not trivialise any ideas put across by the union but should consider each point with the seriousness it deserves. Management should not unnecessarily resolve to remaining adamant on issues affecting the welfare of its employees. Management should not unnecessarily adjourn meetings because this leads to frustrations.

Conclusion:-
This study was based on four objectives and responded to four research questions. The first objective and research question set out to identify the negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with management.
The first objective and research question were answered respectively. The findings of the study revealed that flinch, snow job and chicken strategies were the main negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with management. According to Goldman (1991), flinch, snow job and chicken strategies were among many negotiation strategies used by labour unions in many organisations and companies. The respondents appreciated the use of these strategies and stated that by using these strategies, their objectives were achieved. It was established that the bargaining process took long to conclude although the objectives were achieved eventually.
The second objective and research question sought to assess the effectiveness of the negotiation strategies used by the union during the bargaining process with management. The findings of the study revealed that the negotiation strategies used by the union were effective because they achieved the goals and objectives meant to improve the conditions of service for its members at the University of Zambia. However, the bargaining process took long, about six months, to reach a collective agreement. This indicated that the strategies were not as effective as expected, because if they were, the bargaining process would take a short time to reach an agreement. This was compounded by the fact that management kept adjourning the meetings to take advantage of the ineffectiveness of the strategies used by the union.
The third objective and research question sought to establish the challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management. These too were answered. The findings of the study established that the bargaining process was faced with a number of challenges. The study revealed that one of the challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management was inadequate funding.
The findings revealed that the University of Zambia received meagre financial resources in form of grants from the government of the Republic of Zambia through the Ministry of Education. This problem was compounded by the huge amounts of money that the University of Zambia owed retirees in their terminal benefits. The institution also owed some serving workers a lot of money in form of gratuities since 2010. This made it almost impossible for management to allocate adequate funds to salary increments.
Further, the study established that lack of meaningful dialogue was one of the challenges faced during the bargaining process with management. In view of this, the respondents explained that both parties took deliberate positions to protect their interest. At times, there was no meaningful dialogue because management used intimidatory language during the bargaining process and therefore, members felt threatened to discuss issues freely.
Furthermore, the study established that management remained adamant on issues affecting workers at the institution. It was clear from the responses given by the respondents that management was so adamant that it could adjourn meetings several times before reaching a collective agreement. This was mostly because management took advantage of the ineffective negotiation strategies employed by the union.
The fourth objective and research question were aimed at finding possible solutions to the challenges encountered during the bargaining process with management. The findings of the study suggested: adequate funding to the University of Zambia by the Government of the Republic of Zambia through the Ministry of Education; informing or notifying the union about the meetings in good time, training in unionism and encouraging meaningful dialogue that promotes freedom of speech.

Recommendations:-
In light of the findings, the following recommendations are suggested: 1. the Government of the Republic of Zambia through the Ministry of Education should adequately fund the University of Zambia to enable management allocate financial resources to increments in workers' salaries and other conditions of service. When the institution is funded, management should budget for and allocate enough funds to workers' welfare. Management should ensure that funds meant for salary increments are not diverted to other activities. As an institution, the University of Zambia management should attempt to be resourceful and creative by trying to find other ways to raise funds for the institution other than only rely on government grants. The innovation about the Public Private Partnership (PPP) which the university has embarked on should be strengthened and supported so that other corporate organizations can be encouraged to come on board. 2. the University of Zambia Professional staff Union should not only use flinch, snow job and chicken strategies to bargain with UNZA management. The union should always be reading the situation shortly before, and during the bargaining process in order to carefully select the appropriate negotiation strategies to use. These challenges have been encountered because of the fact that the union has no knowledge about a wide range of negotiat ion strategies. Since the union is affiliated to the mother body, the Zambia Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), it is the responsibility of this mother body to periodically train the executive members on numerous negotiation strategies that should be used during the bargaining process with management. ZCTU has both human and financial resources to effectively train the executive members of the union.
The union should use, among other effective negotiation strategies, the give-and-take strategy which is also called "Compromising strategy" (Shell, 2006). The information that will be gathered from this questionnaire will not be used for anything else other than academic purposes only. I, therefore, wish to guarantee your safety and anonymity. Kindly do not write your name. (a) Strategy used in the bargaining process to reach collective agreement ( ) (b) Strategy used in bargaining process to convince management on some issues ( ) 7. How long do you take to reach collective agreements from the beginning of negotiations to the end? (a) About two (2) months ( ) (b) About four (4) months ( ) (c) About six (6) months ( ) (d) Other, specify …………………………………………………………………….
8. Indicate by ticking the negotiation strategies used by UNZAPROSU during the bargaining process with management. (tick those you have used) 623 (a) Nibble: Asking for proportionally small concessions that have not been discussed previously just before closing the deal ( ) (b) Snow Job: overwhelming the other party with so much information that he/she has difficulty determining which facts are important and which ones are diversions ( ) (c) Flinch: Showing a strong negative physical reaction to a proposal hoping that the other party will change the offer ( ) (d) Chicken: Proposing extreme measures, often bluffs, to force the other party to chicken out and give them what they want. ( ) (e) Deadlines: One party gives another a deadline to force them to make a decision. ( ) (f) Brinksmanship: One party aggressively pursues a set of terms to the point where the other party must either agree or walk away. ( ) (g) High Ball/Low Ball: The use of a ridiculously high or ridiculously low opening offer that cannot practically be achieved. ( ) (h) Others, specify …………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………… 9. In your opinion, how effective are the negotiation strategies used by UNZAPROSU during the bargaining process with management? (a) They are effective ( ) (b) They are not effective ( ) 10 Explain your answer in