Advice for Peace: Ending Civil War in Colombia

(This video has been made freely available by the Program on Negotiation for educators and diplomats to learn about using a team of negotiation experts to bring about peace.)

The civil war in Colombia lasted 52 years, taking the lives of at least 220,000 people and displacing up to seven million civilians. In 2012, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos initiated peace process negotiations with the FARC guerrillas that resulted in an historic agreement in 2016, ending the last major war in the hemisphere. Before the start of the negotiations, President Santos convened a team of international negotiation advisors to bring best practice negotiation advice from other peace processes around the world. This Peace Advisory Team made over 25 trips to Colombia over the ensuing seven years. Upon receiving the Program on Negotiation (PON) Great Negotiator Award in 2017, President Santos remarked that if there were one piece of advice he would give another head of state embarking on a peace process, it would be to convene such a Peace Advisory Team.

In October of 2018, PON hosted a small conference with President Santos and his Peace Advisory Team to draw out the lessons of this pioneering innovation in international peace process negotiations. In this 45-minute video, the members of the Peace Advisory Team reflect on the Colombian peace process negotiations, explain what happened behind closed doors, assess what worked well and what did not, and distill what lessons can be carried forward for resolving future conflicts.

This video features:

  • Juan Manuel Santos, Former President of Colombia, 2016 Nobel Peace Prize Recipient
  • William Ury, Harvard Negotiation Specialist
  • Dudley Ankerson, Political Consultant, Expert in Latin America
  • Jonathan Powell, Chief British Negotiator of the Good Friday Agreement
  • Bernard Aronson, US Special Envoy for the Colombian Peace Process
  • Shlomo Ben-Ami, Lead Negotiator at Camp David

Produced by:

  • The Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School

Akron Steel

Scenario:

Akron Steel, one of the largest recyclers of ferrous metals in the U.S., is looking to expand even more in the next five years. Poor sales performance over the last six months, however, may limit Akron’s access to capital for expansion. A task force investigates the problem to determine the reasons for poor sales performance and provide recommendations to correct the problem.

 

When it’s discovered that regional sales managers were overstating their sales estimates the presentation goes ahead but tempers flare. A facilitator is brought in for a follow-up meeting to address the ramifications of the blow up and help the task force get back on track by rebuilding trust within the group and clarifying what the task force would do regarding the charge of poor sales forecasting.

 

By meeting with each task force member the facilitator determines that the areas of concern are financial impact, customer and supplier relations, and human resources.

 

In groups of six, facilitators and task force members create maps of the conflict using a matrix illustrating how issues should be framed and what agenda the next task force meeting should follow.

 

Players have 30 minutes of preparation time. Mapping the conflict takes about 70 minutes.

 

Major Lessons:

  • the effect of relationships on negotiation outcomes
  • resolving conflict and clarifying issues before negotiating
  • techniques for mapping a conflict in an emotionally charged situation
  • overcoming emotional obstacles in problem solving
  • giving order and clarity to a emotional issue
  • decoding communication

 

 

Materials Included:

For all parties:

General Instructions

 

Role-specific instructions for:

B. Davis: Chair of the Task Force

K. Martin: Product design specialist

R. Nakano: Special assistant to the vice resident of Sales

Facilitator

Allies in Alexia

SCENARIO:

The American Cancer Society (ACS) receives substantial funding from United Way. To reduce the risks of destructive competition for corporate donations and to cement the ties between ACS and United Way, ACS national offices have developed special guidelines for allocating United Way funds within ACS. Several arrangements guaranteeing ACS chapters an annual dollar amount have been in place for years.

Recently, United Way has experienced difficulties, which has led to changes in funding policy. Representatives from three ACS chapters, the United Way, a state utility, and a local nonprofit organization are now meeting to discuss the future of their relationships regarding charitable funding.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • This simulation provides an opportunity to discuss the difficulties facing charitable concerns in their fundraising efforts.
  • The dichotomy between personal morals and professional concerns is especially clear in a negotiation about charitable giving.
  • While most of these people have the negotiations have the same long term goals (helping people fight cancer), they have very different short-term goals.
  • Learning how to work together despite previous disagreements is a major factor in this game.

 

ADDITIONAL NOTES:

This simulation was developed for the staff and volunteers of the American Cancer Society in order to assist them in handling the competitive relationships that have developed in the context of fundraising.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role Specific:

Confidential Instructions for the Negotiator for:

  • ACS Renville Unit Board Member
  • ACS Belton Unit Staff Member
  • ACS division EVP for Alexia
  • United Way of Renville Board member (CEO of Granite)
  • United Way of Belton Staff director
  • Lifeline Executive Director
  • Alexia Power and Light CEO

 

Teacher's Package (77 pages total):

  • All of the above

 

 

KEYWORDS/THEMES:

Not-for-profit management; multiparty negotiating; managing conflict inside the organization; fund-raising

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

Bamara Border Dispute

SCENARIO:

Durnia and Ebegon, two developing nations, have not yet settled their common border. This issue has become critical due to recent oil and mineral development opportunities that have arisen in areas of uncertain ownership. Unfortunately, the two departing colonialist powers left behind substantially overlapping claims, and the history of the region has been marked by tribal conflict. Relations have been deteriorating, and, with the good offices of the U.N., the two countries have sent teams to negotiate a border.

Each team is composed of representatives from its country's Ministries of Foreign Relations, War, and Finance–each of which has a different perspective of the national interest. During the middle of the negotiations, war breaks out. Each side receives a telegram blaming the war on the other side, but the military situation is so fluid that each side is also instructed to seek a cease-fire, a withdrawal of troops, and a resolution of the border, on the best possible terms. Any cease-fire must take into account the fact that where the troops end up will very likely determine the de facto border, unless other arrangements are carefully made.

 

MECHANICS:

Each team should prepare thoroughly, including meeting ahead of time to negotiate priorities and to discuss strategy. The principal negotiation between the two country delegations takes place in two hours.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • U.N. Report on Background of Dispute – includes maps

 

Role Specific:

  • Confidential Instructions for Durnian Diplomats
  • Confidential Instructions for Ebegonian Diplomats.
  • Initial War Telegram & War Map for Durnian Diplomats
  • Initial War Telegram & War Map for Ebegonian Diplomats
  • Subsequent War Telegram for Durnian Diplomats
  • Subsequent War Telegram for Ebegonian Diplomats

 

Teacher's Package (24 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Teacher's Instructions

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • This simulation provides a good vehicle for experimenting with different negotiating strategies. There are a fair number of interests with varying intensities, some shared, some dove-tailing, and other others conflicting. Options for joint gain are plentiful. There are a number of objective criteria as well, in the form of natural features and historical boundaries with varying degrees of legitimacy. Hence, there is no obvious "most fair" solution, and skillful semi-positional bargainers can do quite well.
  • The outbreak of the war can have various effects, depending on the relationship and communication patterns established by the negotiators up to that point.
  • Information exchange is helpful in ameliorating the military crisis and developing intelligent solutions that maximize joint gains. On the other hand, much advantage can be gained by not revealing certain important pieces of information — raising questions of deception and misrepresentation.
  • The simulation provides a good study of the effects of shifting degrees of risk. The war version places the parties under pressure that may result in a power imbalance.
  • Comparisons between internal and international negotiations are illustrative.

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; Anchoring; BATNA; Bluffing; Caucusing; Communication; Competition v. Cooperation; Constituents; Creativity; Ethics; Fairness; Force; Group Process; Information exchange; Interests, dovetailing; Joint gains; legitimacy; Linkage; Managing uncertainty; Meaning of "success"; Meeting design; Misrepresentation; Objective Criteria; One-text procedure; Options, generating; Partisan perceptions; Personality; Political constraints, dealing with; Power imbalance; Preparation; Precedents; Pressure tactics; Reality testing; Risk aversion; Systems of negotiations; Threats

Blueville Health Foundation

SCENARIO:

The Blueville Health Foundation (BHF) has recently been created to fund health initiatives in the Blueville Area. The BHF is run by a 5-member Executive Committee. The Executive Committee of the Board has been charged to set priorities for funding health projects. Unfortunately, the members of the Executive Committee have struggled with how to identify community health issues that need funding, how to engage the community in this process, or even how best to interact among themselves to meet their Foundation responsibilities.

To help the process along, the newly hired Executive Director of BHF commissioned a ‘community health needs assessment’ to help determine priorities. Based on this assessment and discussions with Executive Committee members, the Executive Director has put together a proposal to help move along the process so that quick decisions can be made. This meeting of the Executive Committee has been arranged to discuss the proposal and to make final decisions on the first round of funding (that will cover the first two to three years of the Foundation's existence).

Additionally, the committee members will need to decide on an approach to community participation for future Foundation grant allocation priority setting and decision-making.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions
  • Result Sheet
  • Appendix A-E background information on Blueville

 

Role specific:

  • Confidential instructions for:
  • Dr. B. Mortimer, Chairman of the Board, Blueville Health Foundation
  • N. Limmer, Executive Director, Blueville Health Foundation
  • Dr. W. Lead, Pulmonologist at Blueville Hospital
  • T. Burd, President, Burd and Hascom Associates
  • B. Bott, Director, Speak Up
  • R. Hopen, Senior Project Manager, Food for All

 

Teacher's package (46 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Three possible scenarios

 

KEYWORDS/ THEMES:

Foundations; philanthropy; community participation; managing conflict inside the organization; not-for-profit management; negotiation budge priorities

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

 

BMP Policy Meeting

SCENARIO:

Eagle Aircraft Engines, a manufacturer of engines for military and commercial aircraft, is preparing to negotiate a major five-year procurement for over 1000 parts from its suppliers. Its Airfoils and Casting Division (A&C) is responsible for purchasing roughly 100 of these parts.

Over the last three years, A&C at Eagle has purchased 90% of its parts from two suppliers: Crown and JDC. In preparation for the negotiations with suppliers, the five key personnel within A&C need to generate a "Business-Managed Procurement" policy in which A&C personnel must unanimously agree on four schedule and quality programs. The key personnel involved in the internal negotiation include three engineers, a buyer, and a financial analyst. They have all been sent a memo from the Purchasing Director outlining the overall procurement strategy. The Purchasing Director is putting pressure on them for consensus, emphasizing the importance of certain issues over others in preparation for his/her own negotiations with suppliers.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role specific:

  • Confidential instructions for Ferguson
  • Confidential instructions for McGuire
  • Confidential instructions for Banks
  • Confidential instructions for Roberts
  • Confidential instructions for Archer

 

Teacher's package (33 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Teaching Note

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • To insure relationships that promote quality within the organization, both long-term and short-term interests must be balanced very thoroughly.
  • Teams miss great opportunities to make "trades" with suppliers if they negotiate each issue separately. Packaging is crucial in this negotiation.
  • Deciding how much information to disclose depends heavily on risk-trust, and perhaps the nature of the interest. If the interest is one that will put others at risk, or is driven by professional ambition rather than team goals, it will be risky to share with others on the team.

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

  • Common Measures
  • Multisumma

Bog Berries, Inc. v. the Federal Environmental Agency

SCENARIO:

Bog Berries Inc. (Bog Berries), a large and successful cranberry products firm, has been accused of intentionally dumping toxins into sewers and waterways near its plant. The Federal Environmental Agency (FEA) filed felony charges under revisions of the Clean Water Act. An uneasy settlement deal was reached between Bog Berries and the FEA, but both parties have suffered considerable public relations damage and feelings are raw. Representatives from both sides must now negotiate the detailed stipulations of a new agreement that will allow Bog Berries to continue operation while meeting FEA requirements.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • When the game is played by several groups at the same time, the comparison of outcomes is instructive. Typically, some groups will reach agreement and some will not.
  • Even though the parties are likely to settle, the agreements they reach are typically far from optimal. Pareto-optimal scores can be displayed in this game. The players can then explore how and why superior agreements were not found. The concept of the Pareto frontier can be examined.
  • The range of possible agreements is wide; by comparing agreements, the usefulness of generating multiple options should emerge.
  • The design of the meeting and decisions as to pre-meeting caucus, intra-party discussions, seating plans etc. should be created by the parties.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role Specific: Confidential Instructions for

  • Bog Berries CEO
  • Bog Berries Public Relations Officer
  • Bog Berries Attorney
  • FEA Head Negotiator
  • FEA Head Scientist

 

Teacher's Package:

  • All of the above
  • No teaching note currently available

 

KEYWORDS/ THEMES:

Negotiating compliance; environmental dispute resolution; regulatory negotiation; science-intensive policy dispute; inside-outside tensions; public relations; caucusing

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

Carson Extension

DirtyStuff

Dioxin: Waste to Energy Game

Rad Waste I

Browning Brothers Search

SCENARIO:

To be taught in courses on leadership and negotiation, this role play asks a search committee, consisting of five to six players, to explore characteristics needed in a new leader to right Browning Brothers, a large investment bank and brokerage firm, in the midst of crisis.

Browning Brothers’ CEO was recently fired because of financial and legal irregularities that threw the company into a dire situation where its very existence is in jeopardy. At the initial meeting each search committee explores the nature of leadership and reaches consensus on what kind of leader the company needs to survive and reports its findings to the full board.

 

The exercise also explores the uses of negotiation in leading organizations. Comprehensive Teaching Notes assist instructors in gaining the most value from this simulation.

 

TEACHER’S PACKAGE INCLUDES:

Teaching Notes (including the Sub-Committee Report)

Board Members’ Instructions

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

• Effective leadership, rather than being a personal quality that resides in special individuals, is vitally dependent on the context of the organization, its particular needs at a given moment, and whether its leaders have the skills to meet those needs

 

• Negotiation is a crucially important skill for any leader. How leaders negotiate determines in large measure their ability to achieve organizational objectives.

 

• Effective organizational leadership requires skill at conducting multilateral negotiations and effective coalition building.

 

Bunyon Brothers

SCENARIO:

Four weeks ago, the Bunyon Brothers Construction Company began work on a 77-unit condominium complex at the end of a quiet, wooded, dead-end street named Chestnut Drive. All permits were properly, if quietly, obtained, and the quality of construction is high. Some resistance from the neighborhood was, of course, expected, but tempers now seem to be unusually high and a credible threat has developed of neighbors blocking the site access. The Company's General Counsel has scheduled a meeting with a neighborhood "negotiating committee." In preparation, he has scheduled an internal planning meeting with the Vice Presidents for Construction Management and for Marketing and Development. The exercise revolves around their three-party meeting.

NOTE: This exercise is an intra-team negotiation and is one of the two sides that makes up the exercise Chestnut Village (the other side is the exercise Chestnut Drive).

 

MECHANICS:

The Company officers should meet for 45-105 minutes. A break after 45 minutes for a presentation on intra-group process can be useful. After the completion of these preparation sessions, the groups should meet with one or more neighbor representatives (one or more of the officers at a time, however they chose in their planning session). Neighbors can be played by the instructor(s) or by other participants who have prepared as neighbors in the context of Chestnut Drive. Instructors can model various styles of negotiation. These negotiation sessions usually run about 20 minutes each. Different groups of executives and neighbors can continue by the substitution method (taking over where things left off) or by starting over.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role specific:

Confidential Instructions for the:

  • General Counsel
  • V.P. for Marketing and Development
  • V.P. for Construction Management

 

Teacher's Package:

  • All of the above

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; Authority; BATNA; Commitment; Communica- tion; Compliance; Constituents; Currently perceived choice analysis; Education, as a means; Force; Group process; Media; Meeting design; Precedents; Preparation; Public opinion; Reality testing; Threats; Yesable propositions

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

This case focuses on two major themes. The first is preparation. What is your BATNA? What is theirs? What are their major interests likely to be? What are ours? What does their choice look like now? How, realistically, could we change it? What can they actually do? What can we do? How do we make it as easy as possible for them to do what we want, and hard for them to do otherwise? How do we best communicate all this? What yesable propositions do we have for them? Should we consult before deciding?

The second theme is meeting design and group process. How do three people work together to prepare for a negotiation? Set an agenda? Set strict time limits? Use a flipchart and a recorder? A facilitator? Separate inventing from deciding? And how do they work together in the ultimate meeting? Should they? How do they avoid divide and conquer tactics or distractions that keep them from focusing on any one point? How do they get commitment?

Another important theme is the problem of dealing with a representative of a constituency who does not have firm authority. The neighbor negotiators cannot really commit their neighbors. How should the Bunyon Brothers deal with that? Can either party really agree to what the other wants?

The case also raises the question of relationship and reputation. Both sides have important long-term interests.

Canada-China Panda Acquisition Negotiation

SCENARIO:  

In 2010, after years of communication with the Chinese Association of Zoological Gardens (CAZG) concerning a loan of giant pandas, Toronto Zoo officials see a “ripe moment” to intensify their efforts and undertake formal negotiations.  They designate a Chinese-Canadian spokesman and discuss partnering with Calgary Zoo.  The Canadians face serious challenges, however.  Giant pandas are an endangered species native only to one country: China.  Moreover as “star attractions,” they are in demand by zoos all over the world.  Political and economic factors within and between the two countries complicate the situation.

 

MECHANICS:

The two teams will meet separately for an hour to discuss their objectives and strategies.  The Canadian teams face the challenge of developing an internal alignment.  Then the two teams will meet and negotiate for one hour.  All negotiators stand to benefit from agreement but each has limits on how far he or she can accommodate the others.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • No separate general or “public” information (it is incorporated in confidential instructions)

Role Specific:

Confidential Instructions for:

  • John Smith, CEO of Toronto Zoo
  • Dr. Ming-Tat Li, Chair of Giant Panda Acquisition Task Force, TorontoZoo Board of Management
  • Dr. Clement Dupont, President and CEO of Calgary Zoo
  • WANG Zhongping (family name appears first), Vice-President and Secretary General of the Chinese Association of Zoological Gardens (CAZG)
  • MA Zhong, Deputy Secretary General of CAZG
  • WU Hong, CAZG staff

Teacher’s Package:

  • All of the above (51 pages)

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • To achieve a satisfactory agreement from a low-power position, a negotiator must focus on parties’ interests and resources, and generate creative (non-standard) proposals.
  • Identify and resolve internal differences before commencing external negotiations so that the negotiation team can act cohesively.  Internal cooperation is especially important when the team experiences pressure in external negotiations.
  • Call a caucus as needed during external negotiations in order to manage the team and/or the negotiation process.
  • Among the different negotiation roles that team members may assume, an intermediary (process orchestrator) must have a special set of attributes and skills.  Some of these may be innate or assigned; others must be earned on the scene.
  • To make progress in complex negotiations (many issues of various types), negotiators must clearly and explicitly set forth an agenda of items for discussion.  How, and when, they are discussed should be deliberate and strategic.
  • Negotiators should move back and forth between discussions of the “big picture” and the hammering out of details.  Too much of one or the other bogs down proceedings and leads to suboptimal outcomes.
  • When parties’ positions on one issue indicate no zone of possible agreement, additional issues and package deals should be considered.
  • Negotiators must strategically choose to reveal or withhold information.  Too much or too little information, at the wrong time, can drastically affect the attainment of their individual goals.

PROCESS THEMES:

Bargaining power, coordination of internal and external negotiations, agenda-setting, intermediaries (tactics, effects), information management, interests, aspirations, value creation

Case of the Puerile Printer

SCENARIO:

Six months ago, Liza Brown filed a grievance with Systech's Human Resource manager. She claims that every time she had to go into the back room of the print shop either to pick up or drop off documents she felt extremely uncomfortable because of the suggestive, and even pornographic, calendars hanging in the back room. Liza says that the printer also began to make suggestive comments and even brushed up against her unnecessarily. At that point Liza complained to the print shop manager who told her to keep out of the back room if it bothered her. The results of the grievance procedure that Liza filed were a reprimand in the printer's file and orders for Liza to avoid the print shop. Liza believes that she has been denied a promotion since her grievance procedure because this situation gave her a reputation as a trouble-maker. Since Liza is unhappy with the results of the grievance procedure she asked to enter a formal mediation with an outside mediator, which is allowed in Systech's policy manual.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • This scenario makes it easy to slip into a negative, reactive mode, with unsatisfactory outcomes resulting.
  • Those parties willing to consider the perceptions and interests of the other party as relevant can usually engage effectively in mutually beneficial joint problem-solving.
  • Participants can discuss how partisan perceptions affected their acceptance of differing interpretations of the case, and how they tried to educate the other members of their group as to their perceptions.
  • Fairness and power imbalance questions are triggered by the issues of sexual harassment in the exercise. These two problems can be specifically addressed, or they can be broadened to serve as a base for a discussion of difference issues in negotiating.
  • Some of the managers have to decide how much information they wish to reveal. Where do their loyalties lie?

 

MECHANICS:

At least 7 players are required. This exercise takes 45-60 minutes to run it is suggested that the participants will need 20 minutes to prepare and 30-60 for debriefing.

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; Anchoring; Coalitions; Consensus building; Grievance procedures; Meaning of "success"; Systems of negotiation

Charlene Barshefsky – Negotiating a Trade Agreement with China

Charlene Barshefsky (A):

Set between 1994 and 1996, this 16-page factual case study describes the challenges former United States Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky faced in negotiating a trade agreement with China to improve its domestic intellectual property rights enforcement regime. After briefly describing Barshefsky's past experience and trade negotiations, this case discusses the history of U.S.-China trade relations and analyzes Ambassador Barshefsky's strategy in coalition-building in the United States and abroad toward the goal of achieving a sustainable deal. As a result of her work in this context, Ambassador Barshefsky received the 2001 Program on Negotiation "Great Negotiator" Award.

 

Charlene Barshefsky (B):

Also set between 1994 and 1996, this 17-page factual case study details former United States Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky's strategic and tactical approach to surmounting the barriers laid out in the (A) case.

Both Charlene Barshefsky (A) and Charlene Barshefsky (B) are designed to help students examine complex negotiation and coalition building strategies in an international context. They explore national/ cultural negotiating styles, barriers to doing a deal amidst splintered commercial and political interests, and innovative approaches to surmounting those barriers. The two case studies are related, but may either be used together or separately.

Chestnut Drive

SCENARIO:

Four weeks ago, Bunyon Brothers Construction Company began work on a 77-unit condominium complex at the end of a quiet, wooded, dead-end street named Chestnut Drive. The residents of Chestnut Drive were surprised and angered by this development, but, after some inquiry, concluded that there was little that could be done. Now, however, the construction process has once again brought their tempers to a boil. The neighbors' complaints include: the excessive noise from blasting, dangerously speeding trucks, the lack of a fence around the project area, foul language and habits among the construction workers, and damage to windows and at least one foundation allegedly caused by the blasting. They have elected a six-member negotiating committee consisting of a retired executive, a lawyer, a cab driver, a dentist, a small businessman, and a carpenter. The lawyer has set up a meeting of the community group with the Bunyon Brothers General Counsel. This exercise revolves around the neighbors commit- tee's preparation meeting.

NOTE: This exercise is an intra-team negotiation and is one of the two sides that makes up the exercise Chestnut Village (the other side is the exercise The Bunyon Brothers).

 

MECHANICS:

After individual preparation, groups of (roughly) six neighbors meet for about 90-105 minutes preparing to negotiate with Mr. Murphy of the Bunyon Brothers Company. A message is delivered to the lawyer 10 minutes into the session informing him that a newspaper reporter would like a statement. The group must choose whether or not to spend time on this, and if so, how much. A break after 45 minutes for a presentation on meeting design and group process is often effective. By that point, participants are familiar with the problem and interested in any insights that might be helpful in their remaining preparation time. At the end of the preparation period, groups traditionally have 20-minute negotiating sessions with Mr. Murphy or a management team from the Bunyon Brothers Company, often played by the instructor(s) demonstrating various negotiation styles. The negotiating sessions can be run serially, with one group picking up where the last left off, or consecutively, in either case with the rest of the class observing and thinking how they would proceed differently. An alternative to the instructor demonstration is to have groups of prepared neighbors negotiate with representatives of the Bunyon Brothers Company who have prepared Case No. 10004.0, The Bunyon Brothers.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • This case focuses on two major themes. The first is preparation. What is your BATNA? What is theirs? What are their major interests likely to be? What are ours? What does their choice look like now? How, realistically, could we change it? What can they actually do? What can we do? How do we make it as easy as possible for them to do what we want, and hard for them to do otherwise? How do we best communicate all this? What yesable propositions do we have for them? Should we consult before deciding?
  • The second theme is meeting design and group process. How do six people work together to prepare for a negotiation? Set an agenda? Set strict time limits? Use a flipchart and a recorder? A facilitator? Separate inventing from deciding? And how do they work together in the ultimate meeting? How do they avoid divide and conquer tactics or distractions that keep them from focusing on any one point? How do they get commitment?
  • Another important theme is the problem of representing a constituency without firm authority. Can the negotiators really commit their neighbors? How should the Bunyon Brothers deal with that? Can either party really agree to what the other one wants?
  • The case also raises the question of relationship and reputation. Both sides have important long-term interests.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role Specific:

Confidential Instructions for the:

  • Cab Driver
  • Carpenter
  • Retired Executive
  • Shopkeeper
  • Dentist
  • Lawyer
  • Telephone Message to Lawyer

 

Teacher's Package:

  • All of the above
  • Draft Teaching Note

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; Authority; BATNA; Commitment; Communication; public vs. private; Compliance; Constituents; Crisis decision- making; Currently perceived choice analysis; Delay tactics; Education, as a means; Emotions; Force; Group-think; Group process; Media; Meeting design; Preparation; Public opinion; Threats; Yesable propositions

Chestnut Village

SCENARIO:

Version A: Four weeks ago, the Bunyon Brothers Construction Company began work on a 77-unit condominium complex at the end of a quiet, wooded, dead-end street named Chestnut Drive. Residents of Chestnut Drive were surprised and angered by this development, but the construction company properly, although quietly, obtained all necessary permits. Recent developments have the neighbors fuming. Among them are noise, speeding trucks, lack of a fence around the site, foul language and habits among the construction workers, and damage to windows and at least one foundation allegedly caused by blasting. The neighbors (a retired executive, a lawyer, a cab-driver, a dentist, a shopkeeper and a carpenter) have arranged a meeting with the construction company (General counsel, a Senior VP, VP for Marketing & Development and VP of Construction Management) in an attempt to correct the situation. Each group will have a preparation meeting before an external negotiation is held.

Version B: Same as version A, except the role of cab driver is eliminated and the roles of Senior VP and General Counsel have merged into one.

NOTE: This exercise is a merger of the one-sided exercises Bunyon Brothers and Chestnut Drive and is structurally similar to the exercise Construction in Bunyonville without mediators.

 

MECHANICS:

Allow 90-105 minutes for internal negotiations. External negotiation should last 60-90 minutes. All members shall be present at the meeting but it works best if there is only one presenter for the construction company.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • Map

 

Role Specific:

  • General instructions for the Neighbor Representatives

 

Confidential Instructions for:

  • Cab Driver (Version A Only)
  • Carpenter
  • Dentist
  • Lawyer
  • Retired Executive
  • Shopkeeper

 

General Instructions for Construction Company

 

Confidential Instructions for:

  • General Counsel (Version A only)
  • Senior Vice President (Version A Only)
  • Senior Vice President/ General Counsel (Version B Only)
  • Vice President of Construction Management
  • Vice President of Marketing & Development

 

Teacher's Package (34 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Teaching Note

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; Authority; BATNA; Commitment; Communication; Compliance; Crisis decision-making; Currently perceived choice analysis; Emotions; Force; Group-think; Group process; Media; Meeting design; Preparation; Public opinion; Threats; Yesable propositions

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

This case focuses on two major themes. The first is preparation. What is your BATNA? What is theirs? What are their major interests likely to be? What are ours? What does their choice look like now? How, realistically, could we change it? What can they actually do? What can we do? How do we make it as easy as possible for them to do what we want, and hard for them to do otherwise? How do we best communicate all of this? What yesable propositions do we have for them? Should we consult before deciding?

The second theme is meeting design and group process. How do groups work together to prepare for a negotiation? Set an agenda? Set strict time limits? Use a flip-chart and a recorder? A facilitator? Separate inventing from deciding? And how do they work together in the ultimate meeting? How do they avoid divide and conquer tactics or distractions that keep them from focusing on any one point? How do they get commitment?

Another important theme is the problem of representing and dealing with a representative of a constituency without firm authority. Can the negotiators really commit their neighbors? How should the Bunyon Brothers deal with that? Can either party really agree to what the other one wants?

The case also raises questions of relationship and reputation. Both sides have important long-term interests.

Chiptech

SCENARIO:
Chiptech, a large company that markets a variety of electronic products for business and personal use, is in the midst of its annual budget process. Terry Austin, Chiptech's head of Human Resources, has approached CFO Chris Brown about a budget increase that is far above the limit set in a memo by Brown. Austin claims that the increase is necessary to implement the HR reorganization plan that was recently approved by the president of the company. This is their meeting.

NOTE: This simulation is based on Multimode by Lawrence Susskind.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The degree to which issues other than the percentage increase or cut should come into play is a useful focus for a discussion of good outcomes.
  • Both of the parties want the best for Chiptech, but they have different perspectives on how to do this. Austin wants to improve the HR element, and Brown wants to improve the financial element. This can lead to interesting discussion. Can each party understand where the other is coming from? Does this help them come to a solution, or just keep things civil?
  • CFO Chris Brown has the final say on Austin's budget proposal. How does this color the negotiation?

 

Teacher's Package Includes:

  • One copy of each set of confidential instructions
  • No teaching note currently available. For a similar role-play with a teaching note please see Multimode

Coastal Flooding and Climate-Related Risks in Launton

Coastal Flooding and Climate-Related Risks in Launton is a seven-person, multi-issue facilitated negotiation among local government, community, business, and environmental representatives trying to reach agreement on a strategy for managing climate change risks in a small, beachfront community.

 

The game focuses on managing increased risk of coastal flooding and storm damage through construction of flood protection infrastructure, imposition of flood-proofing requirements, and land use planning. It is one of four exercises developed as part of the New England Climate Adaptation Project.* The Launton game highlights possible solutions for protecting future and existing commercial and residential development, and provides detailed tables and descriptive figures that explain the economic, political, social, and environmental impacts of each option.

 

Scenario:

The small coastal town of Launton has experienced increasingly intense storms over the past decade, resulting in significant damage to homes, businesses, beaches, and other coastal assets. Climate projections indicate that sea level rise and increasingly extreme storms in the future will lead to even worse coastal flooding and storm-related damage. This is particularly worrisome given that Launton relies heavily on coastal properties and amenities for it tax base and tourism-based economy. To address the increasing risk, town officials have decided to incorporate climate change adaptation into Launton’s Comprehensive Plan update scheduled for next year. The Town Manager has convened a task force to consider climate change projections and recommend ways of reducing the risk of coastal flooding and storm damage to existing and future development. The task force’s recommendations are likely to be incorporated into Launton’s Master Plan update.

 

 

Major lessons

  • Climate change adaptation poses difficult planning choices, but there are actions cities and towns can take now to protect themselves that will be beneficial regardless of how severe climate change risks turn out to be.
  • Development, conservation, and infrastructure investments decisions made today will continue to affect communities far into the future. Short-term actions that do not take long-term climate change risks into account could prove extremely costly in the long run.
  • A community-wide approach to managing the collective risks associated with climate change can create opportunities to address other issues while reducing vulnerability and enhancing community resilience.
  • Communities must assess their vulnerabilities and decide which adaptation strategies are most appropriate.
  • Stakeholders may have conflicting interests that shape their views about which public policy choices make the most sense. By working collaboratively and taking science into account, communities can find creative solutions that meet the interests of diverse stakeholders.
  • At-risk towns and cities will have to consider how the financial responsibility for reducing climate risks will be distributed and whose responsibility it is to implement adaptation measures.

 

Mechanics:

This exercise requires seven roles: six stakeholders and one facilitator. Multiple groups of seven can play at the same time. Where there are uneven multiples of seven, players may be doubled up in certain roles.

 

Total time requirement: 2 – 3 hrs

Preparation: 30 minutes

Negotiation: 60 – 75 minutes

Debriefing: minimum of 30 minutes, during which players can reflect on the game experience and how it relates to real life situations

 

Teaching Materials:

For all parties:

  • General instructions, including a climate change risks assessment memo and floodplain map

 

Role-specific

  • Confidential instructions for:
    • Facilitator
    • Town Manager
    • Town Council Representative
    • Emergency Management Director
    • Executive Director of the Great Coast Regional Land Trust
    • Executive Director of the Launton Chamber of Commerce
    • Chairperson of the Brewer’s Cove Neighbors Association

 

Teacher’s Package

  • All of the above
  • Teaching Notes

 

* The other three exercises developed as part of the New England Climate Adaptation Project include:

Coastal Flooding in Shoreham: Responding to Climate Change Risks

Flooding and Climate Change Risks in Northam

Flooding in Milton: Collectively Managing Climate Change Risks