Reference no: EM131837628

Question - Please respond to each question as BRIEFLY as possible.

Q1. Several 'mass-market' negotiation books advise that negotiators should get their opponents to make the first offer. This advice is typically based on the premise that 'information is power' and thus the information communicated by your opponent's first offer will give you a competitive edge.

a. How does this advice compare to our discussions about making the first offer? And what is the underlying mechanism that we discussed for how first offers impact value claiming?

b. What is the logical flaw in the premise that your opponent's first offer will communicate information that is valuable to you? In most cases, what information is communicated by an opponent's first offer? As you consider this, keep in mind that, on average, your opponents are unlikely to be extremely naïve or extremely desperate (i.e., extremely naïve or extremely desperate negotiators are outliers).

c. The authors of these mass-market books typically base their advice on their personal experience, rather than systematic study and testing of their insights. However, personal experience is often not a solid basis for knowing optimal negotiation tactics. Please discuss several reasons as to why personal experience is often an unreliable guide for determining optimal negotiation strategies and techniques.

Q2. Please answer the following questions regarding value claiming (i.e., distributive bargaining):

a. Explain, in your own words, why the following statement is true: "The bargaining zone is one of the most important pieces of information to know, yet you are unlikely to ever know it."

b. How can utilizing an agent enhance the value you claim from a negotiation? How can it harm the value you claim?

Q3. Please answer the following questions regarding value creation (i.e., integrative bargaining):

a. How can proposing multiple equivalent offers enhance your success at value-creation?

b. On average, do negotiations among friends tend to create more or less value than negotiations among strangers? What are the potential risks and benefits of friendship for value creation, and how can you capitalize on the benefits while avoiding the risks?

c. Explain, in your own words, the following statement: "Integrative bargaining is about being hard on the problem, but soft on the person."

4. Please answer the following questions about power in the context of negotiations:

a. It is a reality of our society that power and wealth can be self-sustaining and self-enriching, i.e., that power begets more power. Thus, the rich often get richer, the powerful become more powerful, dominant players (either corporations or individuals) in a market become even more dominant, etc. There are many mechanisms that drive this cycle.

However, I'd like you to consider one mechanism [Having a good BATNA, People (the relationship,) interests (focus on interests, not positions), options (invent options for mutual gain), insist on using objective criteria etc.) that arises from our course material. Specifically, please explain the role of "the greatest source of power in any negotiation" in determining how wealth/power/market share breeds greater wealth/power/market share.

b. Explain how coalitions provide a mechanism through which low-power parties can achieve their aspirations despite their relatively low power position?

Q5. The following questions refer to dispute resolution situations in particular:

a. In your own words, briefly describe what is meant by an interests, rights, and power-based approach to resolving disputes. What are the key differences between them?

b. Why is it a bad idea to solely focus on an interests when resolving your disputes?

Q6. Analyze/explain how a previous, real-life negotiation of yours would have benefitted from our emphasis on negotiation as "a collective decision making problem" rather than solely a contest of wills (OR analyze how a specific negotiation that you expect to have in the future may benefit from this alternate approach).