general management - university of southern...

MOR 569 – Negotiation and Deal-Making 16716, Popovich 212, Tuesday 6:30 – 9:30PM Spring 2013

Terance J. Wolfe, Ph.D.

Email: [email protected] Office: Bridge 307-F Phone: 213.740.0765 FAX: 213.740.3582Office Hours: Wednesday, 3:300 – 4:30PM; by appt

Course Overview

Negotiation is the art and science of securing agreements between two or more parties seeking to maximize their individual and/or joint outcomes. The central issues in this course deal with understanding the behavior of individuals, groups, and/or organizational representatives in the context of ambiguous situations that pose the potential for negotiated solutions.

The purpose of the course is to understand the theory and practice of negotiation as they are applied in a variety of settings. The course is relevant to a broad spectrum of negotiation problems faced by managers and professionals. The content is appropriate for those interested in a wide variety of topics including marketing, real estate, entrepreneurship, consulting, project management, M&A, joint ventures, and cross-cultural/cross-border transactions, among others. The course emphasizes negotiations that occur in the daily life of managers.

A basic premise of the course is that managers need analytic skills to discover optimal solutions to problems, and negotiation skills to get solutions accepted and implemented. The course allows participants to develop their skills experientially and to understand negotiation through useful analytical frameworks. Emphasis is placed on simulations, role-playing, and cases.

Objectives. The purpose of this course is to develop a conceptual and a practical approach to negotiation and dispute resolution. The major objectives for participants are to:

Gain a broad intellectual familiarity of a set of central concepts that will enable the systematic understanding and evaluation of the process of negotiation.

Improve analytical abilities in understanding our own style, needs, concerns, desires, motivations, and outcome preferences, as well as those of counterpart negotiators.

Increase confidence in our ability to persuade and negotiate both within and across cultures.

Understand the negotiation process as an effective means for resolving conflict.

Provide experience in negotiation including how to (1) clarify one’s own outcome preferences as well as those of others, (2) understand and adapt (as needed) one’s own style, (3) evaluate the costs and benefits of alternative actions, and (4) manage the negotiation process.

MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making of 12

mailto:[email protected]

Course Format

The course is designed around a series of negotiation exercises. In a given class session, you can expect any combination of lecture, class discussion, class negotiation activities (to include an actual negotiation and debrief of the experience), and/or video.

All negotiation exercises require advance preparation and active participation. You must (1) be fully prepared for these exercises prior to class, and (2) actively participate in negotiation simulations and post-simulation debriefs.

Some class time may be provided when group preparation is required. However, expect to meet face-to-face or virtually outside of class to prepare for some negotiation activities.

Keys to Exercise Success

There are four keys to getting the most out of the negotiation exercises in this course: Do the readings . Grasp the key concepts of negotiation and conflict management.

Apply course concepts in your preparation for, and participation in, each case. This will enhance your learning and negotiation effectiveness.

Prepare thoroughly . Read the cases carefully and prepare thoroughly for your role in the negotiation. Preparation will rapidly enhance your negotiation skills and competencies, and contribute to the development of these competencies in your classmates.

Design personal learning experiments . Think about your own style and your negotiation effectiveness. Design “experiments” to modify your style to enhance your effectiveness.

Reflect on your negotiating experiences . Draw upon course concepts and principles to explain what happened and how those are likely to apply (or not) in future negotiations.

Achieving the objectives comes only with disciplined preparation and application of the course concepts. Do not expect to improve your negotiation effectiveness through minimal preparation. The bulk of the work is devoted to preparing for, conducting, and debriefing negotiations.

Course MaterialsTexts (required):

Thompson, Leigh. 2012. The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator, 5th edition. Boston: Pearson. Exams will be based upon the 5th ed. Use earlier editions at own risk.

Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books.

Reader (required): You’ll buy this at the bookstore and get very little that is tangible for your money. The cost of the reader covers licensing fees for all the negotiation exercises that will be distributed in class. You must provide me with the voucher that attests to your purchase of the course reader. Bring to class your own copy of the general information for each exercise – this information is included in the reader.

Use your pre-class study time to focus on preparing for, and reflecting on, simulations. Before each session, (1) do the readings, (2) look for what you can use in the upcoming exercise, (3) complete a “prep” sheet (see Blackboard), (4) design personal learning experiments to improve your negotiation effectiveness, and (5) be prepared to experiment, have fun, learn!


Summary of Course Requirements Scores and grades for this course are assigned based on completion of the following:

1. Session preparation 30% 2. Mid-term Exam 20% 3. Personal Assessment 20% 4. Group Project 30%

TOTAL 100%Details are described below; due dates are summarized in the Schedule of Sessions .

Course Assignments and Grading1. Session Preparation (30%) – PLEASE READ CAREFULLY.

This is for preparation and execution of the exercises, and contribution to debriefing discussions. Being here AND being prepared is key. Preparation involves completing the assigned readings and preparing the negotiation exercise. Since I try to observe as many negotiations as possible, it is often quite obvious when a student is not prepared. Evidence of a lack of preparation includes reading or constantly referring back to the simulation materials during the actual negotiation. This harms your negotiation partner’s experience as well as your own, will be noted by me, and taken into account in the final assignment of preparation scores.

We will utilize the ELC during the semester. Negotiation sessions utilizing the ELC are highlighted in gray on the schedule of sessions below. All ELC sessions will be videotaped. Videotapes should be reviewed to understand and critique your negotiation style and learning experiments (see below for a description of learning experiments), and videotapes should be referenced in your personal assessment assignment.

When negotiating, you must follow all the instructions that are provided for your role. However, you do have freedom to be creative in how you interpret this information and the kinds of strategies you employ, provided that they do not contradict any of the explicit instructions or fundamentally alter the negotiation’s structure.

When negotiating, the following behaviors are regarded as inappropriate: reading negotiation counterparts’ confidential information prior to or during a negotiation, sharing “point” values to be obtained for any negotiation prior to the official class conclusion of the simulation, looking up any of our negotiation exercises on the internet or gathering any outside information on the exercises, and information-seeking or intelligence-gathering designed to give you access to information that you are not intended to have in the exercises.

Participation in class discussions involves active participation that contributes to the class. Active participation entails asking and answering questions, making observations, commenting on other students’ comments, or challenging or advancing a point-of-view. Making a contribution means your comments move the discussion forward.

Note: This course has a strict attendance policy. To use our time most effectively, I must determine negotiation partners in advance. It is essential that you provide 24 hour advance notice to me if you have to miss a negotiation. If you do not, the entire class may be inconvenienced. If you miss a negotiation without prior notice, you will be penalized in the final grading. Even if you do provide prior notice, but miss multiple classes, you may also be penalized.

Preparation counts toward your grade, as follows:


NOTE: All written requirements MUST BE SUBMITTED AS A HARD COPY AT THE START OF CLASS ON THE DUE DATE.

a. Course preparation: self-assessment and goal statement – due Jan 22 Complete a two-paragraph (< 1 page double-spaced) goal statement that includes a frank assessment of your negotiation strengths and weaknesses (1 paragraph) and a declaration of a personal goal – what you want to get out of the course. You will be more likely to improve if you decide what you want out of this course.

b. Exercise preparation (4@3% each, [email protected]%) – due with cases (see Schedule) Starting with session 3 (Jan 29), you will complete and submit a preparation sheet for each sim that prompts you to frame a learning experiment, and work through the key issues, interests and positions important to all sides in the negotiation. The prep sheet template is available in the “Content” section of Blackboard.

Typed hard copies of prep sheets are due to me at the start of class. Make a copy for yourself so you can consult your prep sheet during your negotiation.

How are these graded? You may receive a grade of check plus, check or check minus; the mode is a check (√). A check plus (√+) is roughly an A, a check (√) roughly a B+, and a check minus (√-) roughly a B-.

LATENESS POLICY: Prep sheets must be submitted as a hard copy on the day they are due. They are due whether you attend class or not. Failure to submit a hard copy on the due date means forfeiting three to four-and-a-half percent of your total grade per submission – up to a total of thirty (30) percent. That’s a lot!!!

2. Mid-term Exam (20%) There will be one mid-term exam scheduled March 12. The mid-term focus is on your knowledge of key course concepts as presented in the required texts, readings and lectures. Expect multiple choice, true-false, matching, and/or short essay questions.

3. Learning Experiments and Personal Self-Assessment (20%) – due Apr 9 Each participant will design and conduct at least three (3) personal learning experiments intended to improve or enhance your negotiation skills and/or style. A learning experiment is derived from reflection upon an “as is” condition, where an “as is” condition is linked to “concrete experience” (to be defined and illustrated in class). A learning experiment is based upon an “if – then” proposition about behavior and its consequences. It might take the following form: “If I try new behavior X, then outcome Y will happen”. Your experiment will be a test of the validity of the hypothesis. The setting for a learning experiment is any in- or out of-class negotiation exercise.

A learning experiment may explore any behavior you deem to have the potential for improving your negotiation effectiveness. Points of departure for identifying and formulating a “learning experiment” may include, for example, the following:

For example, one might “experiment” with: Your style profile from the Bargaining Styles Assessment Tool Feedback gleaned from your Partner Feedback Forms Styles or behaviors suggested by the required readings Aggressive negotiating style and behavior Cooperative negotiating style and behavior


Anger, toughness, holding firm to a position Friendliness, sincerity Comfort with conflict Silence Pursuit of integrative outcomes Etc…

For each learning experiment, specify the following: The purpose or objective of the experiment The relevance or personal meaning of the experiment The action or behavior undertaken An assessment of your effectiveness in executing the experiment A statement of the outcome of the experiment A statement as to how, if at all, your first learning experiment informed the

design and execution of your second learning experiment A statement as to how, if at all, your second learning experiment informed the

design and execution of your third learning experiment

The Deliverable: Write an integrated 8-10 page assessment of self as negotiator. This is an opportunity to reflect upon and track your personal development as a negotiator across the term. Briefly address each of the following:

Restate (modifying as appropriate) the learning goal(s) you submitted at the second class session.

Discuss your bargaining style profile. What insights does this provide? What learning experiment opportunities does it propose?

Briefly describe each of your learning experiments (minimum of 3) in terms of the situation of the experiment, its goal, design, implementation, and outcome. Include a statement of your perception of each experiment’s effectiveness.

What did you learn from the experiments? How, if at all, have your experiments affected your negotiation style and skills?

(NOTE – you may find it useful to include analysis of your negotiation videos). Reference your partner feedback forms. What do you learn about yourself, your

negotiation style and approach? What insights do you derive about yourself as a negotiator based upon partner feedback forms and videotaped sims?

How, if at all, do you see various forms of cognitive bias impacting your style? What do you now see as the strengths of your style? Its shortcomings? How might your style interfere with your ability to achieve desired outcomes? How do you rate your personal effectiveness in

- Distributive transactions? - Integrative negotiations?

What new learning goal(s) can you formulate for yourself to further enhance your skills and capabilities as an effective negotiator?

Be sure to include (and cite) references to course concepts in the texts and readings.


4. Group Project (30%) – due April 30 A group project and group paper is required, along with a class presentation of it at the end of the semester. The paper should contain about 15 pages of focused, thoughtful, and insightful analysis, in addition to the couple of pages necessary to describe the situation or setting. The target length for the paper is twenty pages of 12 point, double-spaced, paginated text excluding bibliography and appendices. The optimal group size will be based on the number of students enrolled.

For the project, analyze real-world agreements (or failures to agree! – Summer 2011’s debt ceiling negotiation, the more recent debt ceiling negotiations are among those top of mind). Unless approved by me, the agreement(s) selected must have been transacted within the last three years. This may be one in which you have personal knowledge, have access to participants, or which you can analyze through publicly available documents. Papers will take a couple pages to set up and describe the situation, followed by analysis based upon the appropriate application of course concepts. Some questions that might guide your analysis include the following: What kind of agreement was it? Who were (are) the stakeholders? Who were the primary parties to the negotiation? What were the parties’ interests, rights, power, and positions? What problem(s) were they attempting to solve? How did negotiator bias come into play? Were there significant ethical considerations? What went wrong/well, why? How would you evaluate their effectiveness? What could have been done differently? How was the process linked to the outcome?

You may negotiate a format with me.

Please turn in a paragraph of your topic for approval and feedback by Week 5, Feb 12.

Turn in a well-developed working outline by Week 11, April 2.

Final Group Projects due for all groups, April 30.

(5%) Class Ranking of Team Presentations. Each presentation will be ranked by the rest of the class based upon their perceptions of the quality and effectiveness of the presentation, and its learning value.

Post working draft of .ppt file to Blackboard no later than 12 hours prior to your presentation. Provide me a full-page hard copy of final version at presentation.

(15%) Team Paper. Grading of the paper will focus on your ability to use concepts from class to analyze a negotiation and agreement, as described above, and offer thoughtful insights that can help readers understand the case in question. I expect all members to contribute equally to the team project and paper. The group project grade is the highest possible individual grade. If you contribute less than other team members, your individual grade will be lower than the group grade.

(10%) Peer Evaluation. As I will have no window into your team’s process and individual contributions, you will have an opportunity to evaluate the performance of each of your team members. As the peer evaluation accounts for literally 10% of your total grade, peer evaluations can represent the difference in an entire letter grade (e.g., from an A- to a B-) in the calculation of your final course grade.


Viewing Your Negotiation Tapes

Each ELC negotiation is video-recorded. To view a negotiation, fill out a recording slip and write down the record number. This will allow you to store and retrieve the video for later viewing. ELC tapes are stored at JKP 201K. There is a dubbing station in JKP 201K. Viewing (not dubbing) can be done in the JKP ELC rooms on the second and third floors. These rooms are first come-first served. Viewing can also be done at the Keck Center (BRI 200).

Academic Integrity Policy

The Marshall School is committed to upholding the University’s Academic Integrity code as detailed in the SCampus Guide. It is the policy of the Marshall School to report all violations of the code. Any serious violation or pattern of violations of the Academic Integrity Code will result in the student’s expulsion from the degree program.

It is particularly important that you are aware of and avoid plagiarism, cheating on exams, fabricating data for a project, submitting a paper to more than one professor, or submitting a paper authored by anyone other than yourself.

Above and beyond the general campus guidelines for academic integrity, the following behaviors are regarded as cheating in this class: reading negotiation counterparts’ confidential information prior to negotiating, sharing “point” values to be obtained for any negotiation prior to the official class conclusion of the simulation, looking up any of our negotiation exercises on the internet or gathering any outside information on the exercises, and information-seeking or intelligence-gathering designed to give you access to information that you are not intended to have in the exercises. If you have doubts about any of these practices, confer with me.

Resources on academic dishonesty can be found on the Student Judicial Affairs Web site (http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/SJACS). The “Guide to Avoiding Plagiarism” addresses issues of paraphrasing, quotations, and citation in written assignments, drawing heavily upon materials used in the university’s writing program. “Understanding and avoiding academic dishonesty” addresses more general issues of academic integrity, including guidelines for adhering to standards concerning examinations and unauthorized collaboration. The “2012-2013 SCampus” (http://scampus.usc.edu/university-student-conduct-code/) contains the university’s student conduct code.

Students with Disabilities

Any student requesting academic accommodations based on a disability is required to register with Disability Services and Programs (DSP) each semester. A letter of verification for approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP. Please be sure the letter is delivered to me as early in the semester as possible. DSP is located in STU 301 and is open 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The phone number for DSP is (213) 740-0776.


http://scampus.usc.edu/university-student-conduct-code/

http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/SJACS

BASIC INDUSTRIES

1. Analyze the decision alternatives facing Pete Adams.

2. What is Pete Adams’ “frame” of the situation? How does he construct his perception of the situation?

3. What is Mason’s and Courtney’s “frame”? How do they construct their perception of the situation?

4. Develop your recommendation with accompanying rationale for your preference regarding the capacity decision and the location decision. In effect, “frame” the problem from your point-of view. In formulating your response, refer to the Sussman article in the Course Reader, How to Frame a Message: The Art of Persuasion and Negotiation. Utilize his 4-step process for constructing a frame.

5. What advice would you give Pete Adams regarding the location and capacity decisions? Why?


Peer Rating Form for Team Project

Project Topic: ___________________________________________________

Rank order each of the members of your group INCLUDING yourself on each of the items below (1 is best, 2 is next best, etc.). The Peer Evaluation counts towards each student’s final grade. Use the back of this form for required comments as per the guidance at the bottom of this page.

Please list each of your group members below in alphabetical order by last name . Be sure to include yourself.

ALPHABETICAL by LAST NAME, then FIRSTGroup Members: A. ________________________________________________

B. ________________________________________________C. ________________________________________________D. ________________________________________________E. ________________________________________________F. ________________________________________________

Rating Criterion / Group Member A B C D E F1. Quality of contribution to group discussions

2. Quality of contribution to writing the assignment

3. Quality of contribution to organizing the assignment

4. Quality of initiative when something needed to get done.

5. Reliability in completing assigned responsibilities

6. Amount of effort put forth.

7. Commitment to the group

8. Leadership, motivation provided to the group.

9. Emphasis on getting the task done.

10. Emphasis on cooperation and working well with others.

11. Would want to work with this group member again.

TOTAL

Assign an alphabetical grade to each member of the group based on your OVERALL impression of her/his contribution to the group’s performance. You may assign a group member any grade from 0 to A+. However, you cannot assign A’s to more than 60% of your total group members. A 5-person group cannot have more than three A’s, 6 persons = 4 A’s.

Failure to observe this requirement will result in all team members receiving a “B” for their peer evaluations.

On the following page, provide at least three directly observable behaviors that represent what you believe each team member did well, AND at least three behaviors that you observed that represent areas for improvement/development for each team member. This is NOT about personalities, but rather it is about those behaviors that are in service and supportive of successful team work and those behaviors that are not.


Peer Rating Form for Team Project

Project Topic: ___________________________________________________

A:___________________

Did Well (behaviors):

Area for improvement/development (behaviors):

B:___________________



C:___________________



D:___________________



E:___________________



F:___________________




MOR 569 – Schedule of Sessions, Readings and Deliverables Spring 2013Week Date Topic / Assignment Exercise Due

1 Jan 15 Introduction/ Course OverviewCourse structure, process, requirements Thompson, C1: Negotiation – The Mind and the Heart

Sugar Bowl

2 Jan 22 Types of Negotiation – Claiming ValueThompson, C3: Distributive Negotiation – Slicing the Pie

Coffee Contract Goal statement

3 Jan 29 Types of Negotiation – Creating ValueFisher & Ury, Getting to Yes – ALL! Thompson, C4: Win-Win Negotiation – Expanding the Pie

Texoil, Read general information

IPS-1: Texoil prep sheet (3%)

4 Feb 5 Negotiation Style & Negotiation Strategy Thompson, C5 – Developing a Negotiating Style Thompson, C2: Preparation – What to Do Before Negotiation

Principled Negotiation (Hacker – Star)

Bargaining Styles Assessment (Complete, score, review)

5 Feb 12 Frames and the Social Construction of Reality Senge, C10: Mental Models Sussman, Business Horizons: How to Frame a Message:

The Art of Persuasion and Negotiation

Basic Industries Group Project Topic dueIPS-2: New Recruit prep sheet (3%)

6 Feb 19 Cognition and Emotion in Negotiation Thompson, Appendix 4 – Negotiating a Job Offer Thompson, Appendix 1 – Are You a Rational Person?

Viking IPS-3: Viking prep sheet (3%)

7 Feb 26 Relationships in Negotiation Thompson, C6: Establishing Trust and Building a

Relationship Thompson, Appendix 2: Nonverbal Communication & Lie

Detection

Bullard House, Read general information

TPS-1: Bullard House prep sheet (4.5%)New Recruit negotiated prior to Feb 21

8 Mar 5 Power, Persuasion, InfluenceThompson, C7: Power, Persuasion, and Ethics Thompson, C8: Creativity & Problem-Solving in Negotiations

Where’s Alvin, Read general Information

IPS-4: Where’s Alvin prep sheet (3%)

9 Mar 12 Midterm Exam – Thompson Chapters 1 – 8; Getting to Yes – all; Senge, Mental Models; Sussman, How to Frame a Message


Week Date Topic / Assignment Exercise Due10 Mar 26 Final Offer11 Apr 2 Team and Multi-Party Negotiations (1)

Thompson, C9: Multiple Parties, Coalitions and TeamsGadgets, Inc, Read general information

TPS-2: Gadgets prep sheet (4.5%)

12 Apr 9 Team & Multi-Party Negotiations (2) Rice: Individual, Group and Intergroup Processes Trust Building in Intergroup Relations

Alpha – Beta, Read general information

Personal Self-Assessments due (20%)

13 Apr 16 Cross-Cultural Negotiation Thompson, C 10: Cross-Cultural Negotiation

Nora – Sakari TPS-3: Nora-Sakari team prep sheet (4.5%) Note – prep sheet worth 2 normal ones

14 Apr 23 Negotiating Long-Term Relationships Thompson, C11: Tacit Negotiations and Social Dilemmas

Mouse, Read background information

TPS-4: Mouse prep sheet (4.5%)

15 Apr 30 Team Presentations Group Projects Due (30%)

Prep Sheets

INDIVIDUAL PREP SHEETS (IPS) TEAM PREP SHEETS (TPS)IPS (4 @ 3% each) Weight Due Date TPS (4 @ 4.5% each) Weight Due Date

Texoil 3% Jan 29 Bullard Houses 4.5% Feb 26

New Recruit 3% Feb 12 Gadgets 4.5% Mar 26

Viking Inv 3% Feb 19 Nora-Sakari 4.5% Apr 16

Where’s Alvin 3% Mar 5 Mouse 4.5% Apr 23


general management - university of southern...

Documents