Need an essay with insightful analysis of the demonstrated negotiation skill (this includes an analysis of what was done well or what could have been done better- including a description of how) of the following negotiation on this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSs4anDbGfs Video annotations: @ 0:00 — Title: Building Trust @ 0:10 – 1:55 In an effort to separate the people from the problem, build trust, and develop a working relationship, we sat on the same side of the table, facing one another, listened to core concerns, and acknowledged what was being said. We utilized recommendations presented in “Distinguishing Best and Strategic Practices: A Framework for Managing the Dilemma between Creating and Claiming Value” to include treating the other party with consideration and respect, actively listening and seeking to understand and appreciate the other parties perspective.(1) We did this through making eye contact, speaking kindly, asking open ended questions, and sharing information that might inspire wise tradeoffs. @ 0:22 – 0:54 Sharing details: For example, the buyer revealed that their network had taken a hit over the years as a result of buying unsuccessful shows. Not depicted in this clip, the seller revealed that their network has also taken a hit, a financial hit. As described in “The Mythical Fixed Pie,” behaviors in negotiation are often reciprocated, and we found this to be the case.(2) @ 1:00 – 1:53 Sharing information: The seller signals that they are aware that this buyer has more to gain from the transaction than their competitors might. @ 1:56 – 2:58 Once we built a mutual sense of trust, we were able to move forward with really focusing in on our respective interests. As noted in “Negotiation Analysis: An Introduction,” it is important to identify influential players who were not immediately at the table, but could influence limitations and decision making.(7) For example, the buyer revealed that he had limitations placed on him my Multimed Inc. Once we established the authority that we each had, we were able to assess one another’s interests, and we found that each party had multiple interests to include: maintaining a long-term relationship, price per episode, number of runs, financing terms, and the potential sale of Juniors. @ 2:02 – 2:36 Seller verifies buyer’s authority to purchase; buyer uses this as an opportunity to probe seller’s BATNA. @ 3:00 Title: Contingency to expand the pie @ 3:06 – 4:02 The buyer was very insightful to inquire about crafting a potential contingency agreement based upon prospective show ratings as a way to expand the pie. Although a contingency agreement never came to fruition, we did discuss and consider it multiple times throughout our negotiation. Not depicted in this clip, we did state at the end that we would revisit this as part of a post-settlement settlement. By bringing this up in advance of opening distributive issues, the buyer hoped to reduce the sting of the distributive issues. @ Title: 4:03 Anchoring @ 4:05 – 4:25 Banner/Subtitle: On number of episodes @ 4:05 – 5:22 We have learned from “Are You Asking the Right Questions?” that usually, the party that makes the first offer anchors the negotiation and secures the larger share of the overall pie.(4) We found this to be true, as the seller made the first offer (80,000/episode, 4 runs, 50/25/25% financing terms), and set the tone of the potential settlement moving forward. @ 4:11-4:25 While the buyer tries to anchor on 8 episode runs, this approach had two shortcomings: 1) The anchor wasn’t set very clearly. 2) The issue turned out to be fairly integrative, so the anchor didn’t matter as much as it could have. @ 4:25 – 4:38 Banner/Subtitle: On Price @ 4:33 – 5:22 The seller attempts to introduce a price anchor. @ 4:37 – 5:22 The buyer makes an attempt at deflecting (through delay) the seller’s verbal attempt at dropping at the table by suggesting that we move to the board. @ 4:52 – 5:22 This tactic seems to backfire because when the seller did set the anchor, it was in written format, making it hard to rebuttal a lower offer. In hindsight, the buyer might have let the seller make the offer while at the table, then move to the board. Only after issues were listed would the buyer have gone ahead and disclosed his first offer on the board. In order to keep trust levels high, the buyer could have written both anchors down so that we clearly had both ends of the distributive issues on the table. @ 5:29 – 5:36 Banner: Multiple Equivalent Simultaneous Offers @ 5:38 – 6:08 Eventually, realizing this negotiation was multi-issue with a lot of moving parts, we applied the concept of presenting multiple equivalent simultaneous offers (MESOs) as described in “Putting More on the Table: How Making Multiple Offers Can Increase the Final Value of the Deal.”(5) Generating multiple offers frames things through the lens of choice, and allows one party to choose which option works best for them. @ 5:38 – 6:08 As you can see in this clip, the buyer immediately verbalizes which option would not work for him. Not only does this reaffirm the priorities of that party, but this information gathering helps both sides find optimal solutions that integrate all priorities, and craft an agreement that increases the benefits and decreases the burdens to be distributed to both. The buyer immediately listed 3 new options/offers, and we were able to start coming to some agreements. @ 6:25 – 6:55 Through asking open ended questions, as recommended in “Are you Asking the Right Questions,” we were able to reconcile our interests, and identify compatible and conflicting interests early on in the negotiation.(6) We engaged in collaborative consideration of how to fulfill both parties’ underlying interests rather than engaging in positional bargaining. We knew that by gaining important information through the use of open-ended questions, we could enhance the creativity of our settlement. It should be noted that assessing interests is important before and during negotiations, as well as at the end when agreements are being refined and implemented. @ 6:45 – 8:00 The buyer crafts a series of MESOs to determine the seller’s priorities. @ 7:07 – 7:17 Banner: Determining Priorities @ 7:20 – 8:00 We decided to utilize the whiteboard to make a list of the interests we identified, and define one another’s priorities and preferences. We felt that using a whiteboard would allow us to be side by side, facing the issues at hand. We shared what we were willing to compromise on, items of lesser importance, to gain something of greater importance. For example, the buyer placed importance on the number of runs versus financing terms, whereas the seller placed a stronger importance on financing terms. Once we determined what was most important to each party, we were able to move on to crafting an agreement. @ 7:40 – 8:00 And uses that as an opportunity to get both buyer and seller to assign order and rough value to their non-cash priorities. @ 8:01 Title: Finding ZOPA within the context of hybrid negotiation @ 8:11 – 9:07 Banner: Attacking BATNA on distributive issues @ 8:15 – 9:07 As we continued our negotiation, the buyer attacked the sellers BATNA to sell the program to another station, questioning whether the seller’s expectations were realistic. Specifically, the buyer asked if the seller truly believed the other potential buyer would actually air the program. The buyer considered what he could do to change the sellers BATNA, another technique described in “Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.”(3) @ 9:07 – 9:43 Banner: Achieving Pareto efficiency on integrative issues @ 9:09 – 9:43 But for those issues that are not fully distributive, we used the knowledge of priorities to push towards Pareto efficiency, using the distributive issues and smaller issues as benchmarks and ways avoid impasse. @ 9:09 – 9:43 Specifically, we discovered that the seller was willing to max out on runs per episode, and the buyer was willing to flex completely on financial terms. In doing so, we believe that we created the most value for both parties, without harming one party more than the other.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]