| Course | WMBA 6501 Conflict Management and Negotiation |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 6 |
| Paper type | Memo |
| Length | About 700 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Memo, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Business Administration (MBA) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for WMBA 6501 Week 6
Memorandum
To: President, Linden Fastener Supply
From: Purchasing Manager
Date: November 9, 2026
Re: Who should step into the transfer and commission dispute between the two branch managers
The Dispute
For six months the two branch managers at Linden Fastener Supply, the imaginary distributor this course uses, have disagreed about inventory transfers between the Grand Rapids and Holland warehouses. When a Holland customer needs a part that only Grand Rapids stocks, Grand Rapids ships it and Holland books the sale. Grand Rapids's manager argues that his branch carries the inventory cost and the picking labor but gets no credit, which lowers his branch's margin and his team's bonus. Holland's manager argues that the customer relationship and the sale are Holland's, and that shared inventory is how a two-branch company should work. Transfers have doubled this year, so the stakes have grown. Two meetings between the managers ended without agreement, and Grand Rapids has begun telling Holland that parts are "unavailable" when they are on the shelf. Customers are now affected.
Which Third-Party Role Fits
Karambayya and Brett (1989) studied managers who intervene in disputes and found that disputants judged procedures fairer when they kept some control over the outcome, as in mediation, than when the third party imposed a decision. Wall et al. (2001), reviewing mediation research, described mediation as assistance by a third party who helps the disputants reach their own agreement without the authority to impose one.
This dispute fits mediation for three reasons. First, the managers disagree about a rule, how to credit transfers, not about facts; both agree on the numbers. Rules that disputants help write are more likely to be followed. Second, the managers must keep working together every day, and an imposed ruling would leave one of them a loser in a relationship that needs cooperation. Third, the operations vice president, the natural third party, has the knowledge to help design a crediting rule but does not need to dictate it.
The Role It Is Not
The memo does not recommend arbitration, a ruling by the vice president after hearing both sides. Arbitration would be faster, and it would end the dispute on paper. But it would produce a winner and a loser, and the losing manager's branch would have reasons to resist the rule in practice, as Grand Rapids is already doing with "unavailable" parts. Nor does the memo recommend sending the dispute to human resources, which handles conduct issues; this is a business rule dispute, not a personal grievance.
The Intervention, Week by Week
Table 1
Four-Week Mediation Plan
| Week | Activity | Output | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vice president meets each manager separately to hear interests: margin credit, bonus fairness, customer service | Written list of each manager's interests | |
| 2 | Joint meeting to agree on facts: transfer volumes, inventory carrying cost and picking labor per transfer | Shared numbers both accept | |
| 3 | Joint meeting to generate options: split margin, transfer fee, shared inventory pool, bonus based on company totals | Short list of two or three options | |
| 4 | Joint meeting to choose an option and write the rule, with a three-month review | Signed rule, effective the first of the month | |
Meetings run about an hour each; the company is composite.
During the four weeks, both managers agree to an interim rule: any part on the shelf at either branch is shown as available to the other branch, and transfers continue as before. The vice president will check transfer records weekly to confirm it.
If Mediation Fails
If the managers have not agreed on a rule by the end of week four, the vice president will decide one within a week, choosing from the options developed in week three. Telling both managers this at the start gives them a reason to reach agreement themselves, since each will prefer a rule they shaped to one imposed from the options. It also protects customers: the dispute cannot drag on past five weeks. The fallback works as a deadline, and deadlines known to both sides tend to push negotiators toward settlement (Thompson, 2020).
Recommendation
Approve mediation by the operations vice president on the four-week plan above, with the interim availability rule effective immediately and a vice presidential decision as the fallback.
References
Karambayya, R., & Brett, J. M. (1989). Managers handling disputes: Third-party roles and perceptions of fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 32(4), 687-704. https://doi.org/10.2307/256564
Thompson, L. L. (2020). The mind and heart of the negotiator (7th ed.). Pearson.
Wall, J. A., Stark, J. B., & Standifer, R. L. (2001). Mediation: A current review and theory development. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45(3), 370-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002701045003006
WMBA 6501 Week 6 instructions, in plain terms
By the sixth week the parties cannot settle a dispute themselves, and the memo must decide who steps in. It names the third-party role that fits, separates it from the role it is not, lays out the intervention week by week and states the organization's next step if the intervention fails. Instructors look for a choice justified by the nature of the dispute, for example whether it concerns facts, rules or relationships, and by research on how disputants judge different interventions. A week-by-week plan with outputs makes the memo usable. Protecting customers or operations during the intervention, and setting a fallback date, shows awareness that a third party's job includes limiting harm while the parties work toward an agreement of their own.
How the WMBA 6501 Week 6 example is put together
The memo describes the transfer and credit dispute, its growth and its effect on customers. A section argues that mediation fits because the dispute concerns a rule, the managers must keep working together and the vice president can help without dictating, citing Karambayya and Brett and Wall and colleagues. A section rejects arbitration and a human resources referral with reasons. A table sets four weeks of activity with outputs, from separate interviews to a signed rule. A paragraph adds an interim rule that keeps shelf stock visible to both branches. A section sets the fallback, a decision by the vice president from the options developed in week three, and cites Thompson on deadlines. The recommendation closes the memo. Margin comments flag the role choice, the rejected alternative and the fallback.
Where the marks sit in the WMBA 6501 Week 6 rubric
Graders reward a third-party role chosen for the kind of dispute and supported with research on how disputants respond to different interventions. Explicitly separating the chosen role from its nearest alternative carries significant weight. A week-by-week plan with concrete outputs shows the intervention can be carried out. An interim rule that protects customers demonstrates practical judgment. A dated fallback that gives the parties a reason to settle shows strategic understanding. Instructors also look for memo conventions: a subject line stating the choice and a recommendation the reader can approve. Clear organization and properly formatted references settle the rest of the grade.
Common WMBA 6501 Week 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Start by deciding what the dispute is about: facts, a rule or the relationship. Rules that disputants help write tend to hold, which favors mediation; disputes that harm others and need a quick answer may favor a decision. Name the role you choose and the one you reject, with reasons. Plan the intervention in steps, each with an output. Protect customers or operations while it runs. Set a date after which someone with authority decides. Students often lose marks by sending every dispute to human resources, by choosing a role without explaining why or by leaving out what happens if the intervention fails. If you would like a custom sample referral memo for a dispute in your organization, send us the facts.
Get a WMBA 6501 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Include the Week 6 memo prompt, the criteria, and whatever record the case gives of what has already been tried between the parties. A finished referral memo comes back inside 24 to 48 hours and costs nothing the first time. Flag it if the recommendation is restricted to mediation, since the contrast paragraph changes shape.
More WMBA 6501 papers and MBA samples
- WMBA 6501 Week 1: Productive Conflict Verdict Post
- WMBA 6501 Week 2: Conflict Style Diagnosis
- WMBA 6501 Week 3: Integrative or Distributive Choice
- WMBA 6501 Week 4: Bolt Renewal Negotiation Plan
- WMBA 6501 Week 5: Bargaining Power Analysis
- WMBA 6501 Week 7: Role-Play Negotiation Debrief
- WMBA 6501 Week 8: Handling Disagreement Synthesis
- WMBA 6602 Week 6: Nursing Labor Market Brief
- WMBA 6401 Week 6: Pay Compression Analysis
- WMBA 6201 Week 6: Service Advisor Appraisal
- WMBA 6070 Week 6: Debt Versus Equity Financing
WMBA 6501 Week 6 questions, answered
Where can I find a free WMBA 6501 Week 6 sample paper?
The third-party referral memo for a branch transfer dispute is available here in full.
Which role does the memo choose?
Mediation by the operations vice president.
Why not arbitration?
A ruling would create a winner and a loser, and the losing branch would have reasons to resist it.
What happens during the four weeks?
Separate interviews, agreed facts, a short list of options and a signed rule, with an interim availability rule in place.
What if mediation fails?
The vice president decides within a week, choosing from the options the managers developed.