Excalibur Plan

I invested a significant amount of time to prepare for the Byrnes, Byrnes & Townsend negotiation meeting. I represented Mrs. Townsend, the plaintiff in this case and I chose co-operative strategies and tactics for this negotiation exercise. For me to address the liability and evaluate the case, I had to divide the facts in four categories: weaknesses and strengths of the opponent, weaknesses and strengths of my case. From the class discussions, I learned that the success of the negotiation directly depends on the preparation stage, therefore, I carefully assessed the obtained information, evaluated interests of both parties, set out substantive, intangible, and procedural goals, developed mine and my opponent`s BATNA, set the limits, and implemented negotiation strategy and tactics.

Our team approached this negotiation case in a very efficient way. Each of us had a very clearly job assignment. Two people took care of the calculation while the other two people were responsible for the negotiation. Thus we quickly built up a model and provided several options to our counterparts with different terms but same net value of the final bargaining agreement to our team.

Negotiations are a part of daily life whether we are aware of them occurring or not. In everything that we do there are preferred end results and the end results are likely to affect more than one person. The goal in this however, is to ensure that all parties are equally benefited from the actions and reactions that occur to create that end result. While some dealings are done in a more subtle manner without a great deal of negotiation per say there are other situations that would warrant more vocalized mutually acceptable compromises. The purpose of this paper will be to effectively explain a situation of which required negotiation on the part of both parties that almost all of us have endured and that would be the process of buying a

Summary: This was a multiparty negotiation, which involved 6 players all with very different negotiation styles. It was an exercise in which teams easily form a coalition. There were concessions about the value added each team would bring to the “table”, and my team in a situation of power saw how negatively the other teams reacted in name of fairness and how important was to share the pie.

In Energetics meets Generex negotiation, I was acting as a Chief Operating Officer (COO) for Energetics Corporation and my opponent and my classmate Chace Eskam was acting as a COO of Generex Corporation. In this deal, as a COO I was supposed to sell the Wind energy division of the Energetics to Generex. Energetics Corporation was in desperate need of cash due to bankruptcy. Another hurdle was that I could not sell three different locations of Wind plants individually. My company needed cash within three months with no additional terms added to this deal. My another best alternative was to sell all the assets of Wind Energy division to generate some cash if deal with Generex fails in this negotiation. Our negotiation went on for 15-20 minutes during class time and deal was set in $247 millions. My opponent Chace was very tough in this negotiation to deal. He was very prepared with facts and numbers before he came to the table. My opponent asked me lot questions such as the depreciation of the property, equipment’s life, taxes etc. After having lot of discussion we ultimately came to the conclusion that Generex will pay Energetics $247 million right away in cash to purchase Wind Energy division from Energetics.

1. How did you plan for the negotiation? Explain how you decided on a strategy?

For the Texoil negotiation, I was in the role of the Service Station Owner. As such, my main objective was to sell the station and get the best possible agreement. My BATNA was $400,000, which represented an offer from British Petroleum and my resistance point was $413,000 after tax, which represented the cost of my trip. My target was $488,000, which included an additional $75,000 to help tie me over until I found a job upon my return. This resistance point represents a purely financial alternative. However, there were several other criteria or interests other than strictly financial which could have been satisfied through non-financial means. My underlying interest or reason for selling the station was

During pre-negotiation, the goals at the Lambert team was to aim high and be aggressive, thus providing room to negotiation towards target goals: 1) stock ownership of 60/40 ≤ goal of 50/50; 2) provide one seat on the board ≤ goal to agree to

Entering Les Florets negotiation, I had set for myself rules. Besides my will to buy the restaurant, I had some intermediary objectives to help reach my goal. First, I needed to learn more about the seller’s reasons to sell. This way I could offer her different solutions to solve the situation. Second, I needed to be flexible, despite the limit of $160,000. That meant I needed to maintain a margin in the negotiation around the price, and I decided to start with a price of $140,000, saying since I am not usually in charge of buying new restaurants, I am limited in the money I can spend. This way, I could difficultly raise my offer to $150,000 but negotiate other things, notably that the seller would

In our recent negotiation, my partner Dave and I assumed the roles of Alan Hacker, a computer software developer, and Alan Hacker’s lawyer. Being the lawyer in the negotiation my objective was to avoid litigation with my client’s partner Stanley Star and to aid in the continuation of my client’s co-owned company HackerStar. In addition, I would assist Hacker in coming to an agreement that would be satisfying for him both personally and financially. I felt that Dave and I presented a reasonable argument on Hacker’s behalf and, since I was able to apply some of our class readings during the process, I was overall pleased with the outcome.

All the interests can be summarized under “maximizing profits”. Without knowing their actual costs for each of the options, I can’t be a 100% sure of the priority of the issues, but I will need to gauge that based on the negotiations. With the given information, it looks like their issues are:

They will also be able to feedback to you so that you both have a clear understanding of what needs to be done and how it can be done in the best way possible.

Pre-negotiation preparation is essential for the optimal outcome of a negotiation, as it allows one to design a strategy and plan that can increase the probability of a beneficial agreement. Good preparation means thorough understanding of one’s own and the other party’s relevant information, including interests, constraints, and tradable resources. An effective negotiator should know one’s own best

In any negotiation, preparation is crucial; and having a set, outlined process to follow when preparing helps mitigate a potential oversight of any significant issues within the negotiation. Following a set process also helps one stay on task and in-line with what the important issues and factors are in a negotiation. In Bargaining for Advantage, G. Richard Shell provides a well-structured framework to follow in planning for a negotiation. For this reason, I used Shell’s negotiation preparation framework to plan for the negotiation between Rapid Printing Company (Rapid) and Scott Computers, Inc (Scott).

Span must recognize its role in the negotiations process. It has a short- and long-term goal. The short-term goal is to achieve an amicable conclusion to the current contract. The long-term goal is securing future contracts.