A Green Victory Against Great Odds, But Was It Too Little Too Late?

SUMMARY:
This case study provides an intimate view into the fierce battle among major US nonprofit environmental groups, Members of Congress, and industry over energy policy in 2007. The resulting law slashed pollution by raising car efficiency regulations for the first time in three decades. For negotiators and advocates, this case provides important lessons about cultivating champions, neutralizing opponents, organizing the masses, and using the right message at the right time.

This case is based on the actual negotiations and offers lessons for business, law and government students and professionals in multiple subject areas. They include negotiation, climate change, sustainability, corporate social responsibility, and more.

Q&A
We recently asked author Gina Coplon–Newfield to discuss her case study. Here’s what she had to say:

Q. Tell us about your case study “A Green Victory Against Great Odds” and why should teachers and trainers consider adding it to their curriculum?

A. This case showcases an exciting battle in Congress for major energy policies that have slashed pollution and provided new opportunities for clean energy solutions. I wrote this case, in part, to show that it’s not just corporate and government leaders who make change in the world, but nonprofit and community advocates too. The path to an imperfect victory that I describe in this case provide important lessons for people of all political persuasions trying to understand how we create meaningful public policies and improve lives in the United States.

Q. What type of class is it best suited for?

A. I think students of policy, government, negotiation, environmental studies, grassroots organizing, and non-profit leadership will learn a lot from this case.

Q. What are the major lessons?

A. Find your champions and keep them champions. Frame your issue and your message in the right way. Organize people to speak up to policymakers; it’s a key ingredient to success.

Q. What distinguishes “A Green Victory Against Great Odds” from other case studies that might appear to be similar?

A. When researching this case, I interviewed people who had put their hearts and souls and intense strategic thinking into campaigning for energy solutions. I think you’ll find that their passion and the surprising lessons they learned shine through when you read the case.

Q What qualities do the most effective environmental policy-makers/advocates posses?

A. Depending on the moment, patience and impatience. Also, strong attention to building and keeping relationships.

Q. What are you most excited about in the ever-evolving movement toward cleaner energy?

A. We already possess most of the solutions we need to protect our health and our planet and to lead us to a strong clean energy economy. Our exciting challenge is to catalyze government, private industry, and ordinary people to put these solutions into practice. Plug-in electric vehicles, for example, meet the needs of many people in our society. They are fast, fun, technologically exciting, cheaper to fuel, and lower in emissions. We just need the right government policies, corporate commitment, and public education to make them an exciting choice for people.

This case study includes the following:

  • Detailed Case Study
  • Case Timeline
  • Case Study Discussion Questions

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

Alplaus Supply Company

SCENARIO:

The senior field representative for Alplaus Supply Company is meeting with the General Manager of a company that prints and distributes many kinds of documents. The general manager recently bought a machine that performed simple folding and envelope-stuffing tasks. The machine was a good deal, but now the company is having some problems with it. The general manager wants to return the machine. The field representative knows that Alplaus has already gone over their returns budget for this month. This negotiation is based on The Blender by Bruce Patton.

MECHANICS:

This is a simple two party that may be done with teams or individually.

TEACHING MATERIALS:

Role Specific:

  • General Manager
  • Field Representative for Alplaus Supply Company

 

Teacher's Package:

  • All of the above

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The scenario makes it easy to slip into a negative, reactive mode, with unsatisfactory outcomes usually resulting.
  • Those parties willing to consider the perceptions and interests of the other party relevant can usually engage effectively in mutually beneficial joint problem solving.
  • The perception of who is in power in this negotiation and how that affected the results of the negotiation can be explored by comparing different groups.
  • In this negotiation, unlike in The Blender, the two parties have a previous relationship, and may have one in the future. The values involved are also much larger.

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

Ancolet Corp. v. Elson Realty Trust

SCENARIO:

Ancolet Corporation is a small manufacturing company. They rent space from Elson Realty Trust. Recently, Ancolet needed to re-configure their space in order to make room for new equipment. They made a deal with Elson, and Elson employees began construction. Many problems ensued. Ancolet put its rent payments in an escrow account for the last several months in protest. They are now suing Elson for lost revenue due to the damage done to their machines and the business lost during the construction. Elson counter-sued for the rent due. The judge wants the case settled before it comes to trial. Now the lawyers and their clients are meeting to discuss settlement.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions
  • Statement of Damages

 

Role specific:

  • Elson (and counsel)
  • Ancolet (and counsel)

 

Teacher's package:

  • All of the above

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The potential tension between preserving a good working relationship and pressing hard for what might be seen as substantive concessions is a central concern.
  • One side is specifically told that they are tough negotiators. It is interesting to see how that affects their style during the actual negotiation.
  • There is an enormous gap between how much money Ancolet wants to receive and how much Elson is willing to pay. A lot of creativity is required in order to settle this case.
  • There is a very small zone of agreement.

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

Armenia/Azerbaijan/Nagorno Karabakh

SCENARIO:

This case is based on the ethnic conflict between the ex-Soviet Transcaucasian states of Armenia and Azerbaijan over the predominantly Armenian enclave of Nagorno Karabakh, located within Azerbaijan. Armenia and Azerbaijan have been at war with each other since the late 1980s, although animosities go back many centuries. This study brings together influential private citizens from both sides of the conflict and attempts to involve them in an interactive dialogue intended to change relationships among the participants. It is based on the assumption that, although governments are the official bodies responsible for making peace agreements, citizens have a critical role in peace-making, as they are best equipped to address the non-negotiable human issues in ethnic conflicts. The case study is based on real-life efforts undertaken by several U.S.-based non-governmental organizations to bring together influential individuals from countries entangled in bitter ethnic wars.

Each party in this negotiation has experienced more or less directly the war that has engulfed the region. Not only do the participants have fresh memories of the wrongdoings by the other side, but they also carry with them a sense of historical injustice for the real or exaggerated harms perpetrated by the other nation. Each group does not realize, however, that the other one carries a different and incompatible view of the history of the region. These different views are a product of diverging versions of history perpetrated through the educational system and word-of-mouth learning.

The parties must deal with the issues of fairness, historical injustice, historical blaming and, if possible, the power of apologizing. They have to grapple with the difficulty of moving beyond the circle of hate, which they have been conditioned to nurture. They have to face the decision of whether to acknowledge the pain and suffering on the other side and whether to end the blaming game, becoming able to make plans for the future with the perceived "enemy." Finally, they must engage in the process of building coalitions not only within their own group but perhaps also with the other.

 

MECHANICS:

This is a 13-participant, two-team facilitated role simulation. It may be played without a facilitator if necessary. Both teams should meet privately before the official negotiation begins. The intra-team preparation time should take at least 1 hour, and the actual negotiation time ranges between 4 and 6 hours. Debriefing may be run at another time and should last at least 1 hour.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • International Daily New Article
  • Public Peace Process Policy
  • Soviet Nationalities Policy

 

For each team:

  • Armenian history(for Armenian team)
  • Azerbaijani history (for Azerbaijani Team)

 

Role specific:

  • Fuad
  • Irana
  • Maral
  • Yosef
  • Marif
  • Adrineh
  • Anoush
  • Armen
  • Haig
  • Levon
  • Narmina
  • Facilitator

 

Teacher's Package (46 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Facilitator's guide
  • Teaching Note

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The importance of understanding the human dimension in ethnic conflicts and the difficulty of proposing solutions without grasping the complexity of the relationship.
  • The application and study of the major negotiation techniques in settings that do not involve negotiating, e.g., active listening.
  • The role of partisan perceptions, prejudices, and blaming in ethnic conflicts, and ways to move beyond them.

Arms Control on Cobia

SCENARIO:

The negotiation is set on the fictitious continent of Cobia, composed of eight countries. A race has developed on this continent between the two major countries, Algo and Omne, as well as Algo's smaller ally, Utro, for the development of a new chemical weapon, PS-182M. Furthermore, both major powers are racing to develop means to deliver this chemical weapon against the other by air, to overcome a natural barrier between them in the Smokey Mountains. There is great concern on the continent both about the dangers of conflict between the opposing alliances using this weapon, as well as about the environmental consequences of its use for the three nonaligned states on the continent. Therefore, the International Arms Control Conference has been called in St. Anton, capital of nonaligned Ingo, to try to negotiate a ban on this weapon, or at least its testing, as well as other related issues. During the course of the negotiations "news bulletins" may be issued changing the international environment within which the negotiations are taking place, either by the outbreak of a major crisis among the participants or by the attainment of a major agreement resolving other outstanding disputes only indirectly related to the content of this negotiation.

 

MECHANICS:

This issue is negotiated in one conference room where all eight countries (and perhaps a Secretary-General) are seated around a single table. If possible record the negotiations. In addition, the negotiators need to be able to consult with their Foreign Minister (normally played by the instructor or teaching assistants) in a nearby consultation room. The negotiation normally lasts three hours, and it is desirable to have at least a half-hour for preparation prior to the actual opening of the negotiation and another half-hour for debriefing. Therefore, it is best run in a block of four hours, though this can be modified by one hour in either direction without serious consequences.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • Description of the issues under negotiation
  • Description of each of the countries of Cobia
  • General Instructions
  • Joint Memorandum
  • Map of Cobia
  • New Bulletins

 

Role specific:

  • Representatives of the Republic of Ingo
  • Representative of the Kingdom of Exton
  • Representative of the Kingdom of Carta
  • Representative of the Republic of Omne
  • Representative of the Principality of Sarto
  • Representative of the Kingdom of Algo
  • Representative of the Republic of Utro
  • Representative of the Federated States of Bata
  • Secretary-General

 

Teacher's package (48 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Teaching Note
  • Suggested Readings

 

MAJOR LESSONS

  • This is a complex, multi-issue, multi-party negotiation that requires considerable problem-solving for the negotiators to arrive at agreement. Since some issues turn out to be non-negotiable, the negotiator's ability to disaggregate (or fractionate) the issues is critical to their success.
  • In order to avoid unnecessary frustration at trying to reach agreement on non-negotiable issues, clear commitments by the major parties about their BATNA's tends to facilitate negotiating success.
  • The existence of the Foreign Minister who issues negotiating instructions means that all negotiators must be responsible to a domestic constituency, which places limits on their latitude to negotiate freely. Negotiators must thus learn to negotiate in a constrained environment, and to negotiate equally effectively with the Foreign Minister as well as with the other parties to the negotiation.
  • The assumption by the nonaligned states of active roles as mediators between the two competing alliances tends to contribute to an ability to reach successful agreements. Furthermore, the ability of the nonaligned to maintain a position of perceived neutrality is crucial to their playing this mediating role effectively.
  • Implications for several "real world" international analogues may be discussed by the instructor as part of the debriefing; suggestions along this line are contained in the Instructor's Manual.

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; BATNA; Caucusing; Coalitions; Commitments; Communication; Competition v. Cooperation; Currently perceived choice analysis; Enforcement and verification of agreement; Formula-detail negotiation; Fractionation; Group process; Integrative bargaining; Issue control; Joint gains; Managing uncertainty; Mediation; Political constraints (dealing with); Power imbalance; Pressure tactics; Risk perception; Systems of negotiation; Trust; Yesable propositions

Athens-Melos Role Play

The Athens-Melos Role Play is a simulation from the Workable Peace Curriculum Series unit on Ancient Greece and the Peloponnesian War.

OVERVIEW OF THE ATHENS-MELOS ROLEPLAY:

The Athens-Melos Role Play is based on the historical conflict between the Greek city-states of Athens and Melos, in the year 416 BCE. It takes place during the seven-year interlude of peace in the middle of the Peloponnesian war between Athens and Sparta.

As background to the simulation, Melos is an island in the Aegean Sea that is culturally connected to Sparta, yet deeply values its independence. During the first phase of the war, Melos had favored neutrality, but in 426 BCE Athens had attempted to invade Melos. Melos successfully fought off the invaders, and, according to the report of a captured Melian sailor, appeared to have contributed money to the Spartan war fund.

In 416 BCE (the setting for the role play), Athens has sent a fleet and soldiers to demand that Melos join the Delian League, a coalition of Greek city-states led by Athens for more than 60 years. Athens is particularly worried about Melos’ connection to Athens' enemy, Sparta, and is also interested in converting Melos into a democracy. The leaders of Melos do not want to give up their stable oligarchic government or their independence, and immediately send a messenger to Sparta to ask for help. Now, delegates from Athens and Melos are meeting to see if they can avoid war. The delegates must decide (a) whether Athens and Melos will establish a military truce to reduce tensions during the negotiations; (b) whether Melos will join the Delian League; (c) if so, whether Melos will contribute tribute, troops, or ships to the League; and (d) whether Melos will retain its own form of oligarchic government.

 

GOALS OF A WORKABLE PEACE ROLEPLAY:

The Athens-Melos Role Play aims to:

  • Provide accurate historical and background information on Ancient Greece, the Peloponnesian War, and the conflict between Athens and Melos, and provide opportunities for students to engage with this history in a direct and realistic context.
  • Stimulate and motivate student learning through active participation, as well as through reading, writing, class discussion, and other forms of analysis and expression.
  • Build students’ negotiation and conflict management skills by asking them to take on the roles of participants seeking to resolve a conflict through negotiation, with support and feedback as they prepare, conduct, and debrief the role play.
  • Challenge students to find the links between the conflict presented in the role play and the conflict resolution steps presented in the Workable Peace Framework, and the links to other conflicts in history and in their own lives.

 

Teacher's Package includes:

  • History and General Instructions
  • Confidential Instructions for the Athenian Admiral, the Ruler of Melos, the Athenian General, and the General of Melos
  • Framework for a Workable Peace
  • Teaching Notes

 

If you would like additional information about the Workable Peace framework and teaching materials, including information about teacher training and support, please contact Workable Peace Co-Directors David Fairman or Stacie Smith at:

The Consensus Building Institute, Inc. 238 Main Street, Suite 400 Cambridge, MA 02142 Tel: 617-492-1414 Fax: 617-492-1919 web: www.cbuilding.org Email: stacie@cbuilding.org

Axis Affair

SCENARIO:

Version A: Axis Electronics is a huge Silicon Valley-based computer firm with its Microcomputer Development division of sixty employees located just outside Boston. Richard Van Heusen, Executive Vice President of Microcomputer Development, hired Denise Webster, a life-long New Englander with high academic credentials in microcomputers, to work as a manager in the division; she is the first female manager in that division, and the only professional woman with whom Richard has dealt in twenty years of business. An extremely challenging work assignment (solo development of a mouse/drawing pad prototype), followed by a series of social advances by Richard, leads Denise to work at home and miss work without explanation. Richard, stating that the project is in jeopardy and that Denise is not committed to Axis, demotes her from her position as project head and gives her notice of termination. Denise's attorney meets with Axis' in-house counsel to discuss the situation and attempt to resolve it before commencing any formal legal activity. Neither party knows much about the other's interest. Resolution of the situation is possible without litigation; while there are salary and profit figures to be handled, and agreement should not occur unless the specific problems of possible sexual harassment and gender discrimination between Richard and Denise are discussed and settled, and a company policy and grievance process for future situations is discussed as well.

 

Version B: Same as Version A, except that Axis Electronics is a 500-employee computer firm located in Massachusetts; Denise is not specified to be a lifelong New Englander, and has experience with personal computers as well as microcomputers. In this version, it may be possible to gloss over the current situation, but it will not be possible to reach an agreement which involves rehiring Denise but does not set up a company policy and grievance process for handling future situations involving possible sexual harassment and gender discrimination.

 

MECHANICS:

The exercise works best with one attorney per side. The parties' instructions require 20-30 minutes to read and analyze. Negotiation can take 40-50 minutes; review can last anywhere from 40-90 minutes.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS (Both Versions):

For all parties:

  • Review Questionnaire

 

Role Specific:

  • Axis Electronics Attorney
  • Denise Webster's Attorney

 

Teacher's Package (26 pages total):

  • All of the above material
  • Teaching Note
  • List of Suggested Readings

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The partisan perceptions on each side can contribute to difficulty in understanding the other party's "take" on the situation and its causes. Attempts to educate can take place at two levels: educating the other negotiator, and educating the client. Participants can discuss how partisan perceptions affected their acceptance of differing interpretations of the case at hand, and the methods they used to try to educate their negotiating partner. The group can discuss possible ways to educate clients, in the initial interviews and in the post-negotiation discussion and presentation of an agreement for approval (this will be helpful for the client memos each side is required to write after the exercise and review).
  • Fairness and power imbalance questions are triggered by the issues of sexual harassment and gender discrimination present in the exercise. These two problems can be specifically addressed, or they can be broadened to serve as a base of discussion of difference issues in negotiating. Participants can explore the possibilities of miscommunication, societal causes, how the presence of a possible stereotype or difference affects negotiating strategy, and how to balance a desire for social change with the client's interests in this case.

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Attorney/Client relations; BATNA; Disclosure; Issues of difference; Fairness; Interests, dovetailing; Interests, internal ordering; Lawyering; Objective criteria; Partisan perceptions; Power imbalance

Baker & Irwin v. Department of Human Services

SCENARIO:

The Department of Human Services is the state agency charged with, among other things, the selection of foster parents in whose homes children will eventually be placed. The need for foster parents is high and is growing. The DHS interviews Baker and Irwin, a gay couple, finds them to be very qualified, and places two foster children with them. The World publishes and article on the foster placement, and an uproar ensues. DHS announces a new policy which limits social workers' discretion in approving foster parents and states that homosexuality is a detrimental factor in determining eligibility. The two children are removed from Baker & Irwin's home and are placed with another family. The attorney from the Lesbian and Gay Advocates and Defenders meets with an attorney from DHS to discuss possible out of court settlements to the lawsuit brought by Baker and Irwin. The parties have competing interests, both with each other and internally. LGAD is anxious to have high publicity, but Baker and Irwin would prefer to be out of the spotlight. DHS has a potential conflict between the interests of the department and those of the governor, who is running for President and wants only positive publicity. Resolution of the situation is possible, but will require that each party address the competing concerns at both levels.

 

MECHANICS:

The exercise is designed to work with one attorney per side. The parties' instructions require 20-30 minutes to read and analyze. Negotiation takes about 1 hour, and review can run anywhere from 40-90 minutes.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role Specific:

  • DHS Attorney
  • LGAD Attorney

 

Teacher's package (18 pages total):

  • All of the above material
  • Teaching notes

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • When the interests of constituents and clients are in competition, negotiators are in a difficult position. This difficulty is compounded when the negotiator's own values or interests in an issue are strong. Participants can discuss how these multiple interests affected their approaches to the negotiation and eventual settlement.
  • Different perceptions and different interests may lead to different conclusions about the desirability of negotiated settlements over litigation. Participants can explore the potential impacts of each method on the interests of their parties, and can discuss how to balance these interests.
  • Negotiators who must present settlements to the public may feel different levels of flexibility than those who negotiate in public. Participants can discuss how the impending press conference altered their behavior during the negotiation and how it impacted the final drafting of a settlement.

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Difference Issues; Fairness; Interests; Legitimacy; Options, generating; Power imbalance

Ballet’s Me Too

SCENARIO:

When a reinterpretation of West Side Story opened on Broadway, picketing and #MeToo demonstrations preceded and followed the opening. The protest publicized the sexual abuse and hostile work environment a female dancer suffered two years earlier when she worked with Amar Ramasar, one of the leads in the West Side Story production; a principal dancer and one of the first dancers of color at the New York City Ballet.

The lead producer of West Side Story and other investors are negotiating with the Salt Lake City Ballet West Board of Directors to perform in Salt Lake City for a run of at least four months.  The SLC Ballet West Board is concerned that the picketing and demonstrations will follow the show from New York, embarrass the Board and the community, and cause a drop off in ticket sales during the run.  The SLC Ballet West Board is seeking indemnification (and protection) if civil disruption occurs.

Major lessons in this exercise include:

  • How should concerns around sensitive issues like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter be taken into account in the design and management of negotiations?
  • The role of ethics and values in distinguishing between positions and interests in this type of situation.
  • How do relationships benefit or impede negotiations, especially when the parties will likely need to carry on working relationships long after the conclusion of the negotiation?
  • The role of the mediator, and what, if any, value added they provide in the dispute resolution process.

There are two versions of this simulation. Version A includes only the counsel for the parties, whereas Version B includes Waterbury and Ramasar appearing pro se.

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

Blender, The

SCENARIO:

The complaints clerk in a department store sees a customer coming with a blender recognizable as one of the store's special super-sale items. The store cannot return these items to the manufacturer. The clerk has a small weekly budget to absorb the cost of such items, if returned, and the department head has instructed that it be used sparingly. The budget for this week is overspent. The customer, having used the blender for over a week, believes it is either defective or an inadequate appliance, and has therefore decided to return it.

 

 

 

MECHANICS:

This negotiation works well as one-on-one, but can be extended to two-on-one, by including another participant on either side. It takes no more than five minutes to run; debriefing can last up to half an hour with several replays. The exercise can be run as is, or one or both parties can be given additional psychological instructions about their character (making it more of a role play for that party, instead of a negotiation).

 

 

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The scenario makes it easy to slip into a negative, reactive mode, with unsatisfactory outcomes often 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.
  • The persuasive effect of threats, cajoling, anger, helplessness, crying and other techniques can be explored.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

Role Specific:

  • Confidential Instructions for the Clerk
  • Confidential Instructions for the Consumer

 

Teacher's Package:

  • All of the above

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

 

 

SUBJECTS:

Consumer; Interpersonal; Psychological; Small claims

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Apologies; BATNA; Communication; Credibility; Emotions, role of; Fairness; Interpersonal skills; Misrepresentation; Nonverbal communication; Objective criteria; Power imbalance; Threats; Yesable propositions

 

Brachton Collective Bargaining Exercise

Also known as Brachton School

SCENARIO:

The Brachton Teacher's Union has been negotiating with the city's School Committee over teacher contracts which will shortly expire Lately, Brachton public schools and teachers, funded largely through local property taxes, have come under some fire. Some fear that political and personal commitment to the Brachton schools has diminished. There is pressure on the school committee, headed by the mayor, for a tax cap and moratorium on all city salaries, including teachers. The issues have been identified and all that is left is for the two groups to hammer out an agreement.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • There are often legitimate differences within bargaining teams. These internal conflicts ought to be worked out before serious bargaining begins as unresolved internal conflict can create problems when it comes time to ratify carefully crafted draft agreements. This exercise creates opportunity for team participants to practice techniques and strategies of managing internal team conflict.
  • In most collective bargaining situations, each side begins by staking out its position. both usually do this before they even hear what the concerns are of the other side. This often leads to the process of trading concessions which results in minimally acceptable outcomes. To achieve maximum joint gains it is necessary to focus instead on listening to the interests of the other side before staking out opening positions. The best techniques for probing interests can be studied.
  • This exercise allows the players to explore the influence of threats on the behavior of other parties.
  • The game raises questions of relationship, precedent and reputation. all sides have important long-term interests.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions
  • Present Salary Schedule

 

Role Specific:

Confidential Instructions for the Union

  • Union Representative: Bornhofft
  • Union Representative: McKeller
  • Union Representative: Whitesides
  • New Union Representative

 

Confidential Instructions for the School Committee

  • Representative: Gray
  • Representative: Pedrotti
  • Representative: Sehnert
  • New School Committee Representative

 

KEYWORDS:

Agenda control; caucusing; competition v cooperation; consensus building; dovetailing; threats; recurring negotiations; labor-management; school budgets; role of agents

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

Collective Bargaining at Central Division

MAPO- Adminstration Negotiation

Bradford Development

SCENARIO:

Bradford, an old New England industrial city, is experiencing an economic boom. The city has recently adopted a ‘linkage agreement’ policy, requiring developers to make once-off payments to the city to offset infrastructure and housing costs. Curry Corporation (‘Curry’) is the first developer to propose a major project under the new administration. After meeting with all the appropriate municipal agencies and citizen groups, the only major issue left unresolved in the proposed project is the appropriate size of the linkage payment that Curry should make to the city.

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • Pre-negotiation analysis should include a realistic appraisal of one's BATNA. This provides a reference point against which proposed offers can be evaluated. It is important for each party to assess not only its own BATNA, but also that of the other party. This can also be done in the course of the negotiation itself by trying to elicit information from the other party about its alternatives.
  • Distributive bargaining divides up a fixed pie, and is therefore inherently constant-sum. One party's gain is another party's loss.
  • Each party should explore the interests of the other side before making an offer. Making an offer before exploring the other side's interests could anchor the bidding too high or too low, thereby minimizing one's own potential gains.
  • When the negotiating parties are involved in an ongoing relationship, it is rarely (if ever) prudent to lie or misrepresent one's interests.

 

ADDITIONAL NOTES:

This game can be played with multiple and simultaneous groups of four.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all Parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role Specific:

  • Confidential Instructions for Municipal Negotiation Specialists
  • Confidential Instructions for Curry Representatives

 

Additional Teaching notes:

  • Detailed notes including:
  • FAQ by parties about their instructions
  • Debriefing guidelines for the instructor
  • Discussions about the use of one's BATNA
  • Comments about the distributive bargaining process
  • Comments about lying and misrepresentation
  • Summary of lessons
  • Exam Questions

 

KEYWORDS:

BATNA; Bluffing; Credibility; Ethics; Integrative bargaining; Legitimacy; Linkage; Misrepresentation; Real estate development

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

Negotiated Development in Redstone

Caitlin’s Challenge

Caitlin's Challenge is a short case with an accompanying video written and produced by Deborah Kolb. The case recounts Caitlin Elliot's history with a company called Microenterprises Incorporated as the background to a negotiation she plans to have with its CEO, George Baker, about a promotion and bonus. The video shows Caitlin's negotiation discussion with George. The case and video are set within an organizational context with potential gender issues as part of the negotiating context. The case lends itself to a discussion about what makes negotiating for oneself in an organization more challenging than negotiating on behalf of others, how to prepare for a negotiation where personal issues are at stake, and what strategies work best in dealing with a difficult boss. Gender issues can be discussed at individual, interactional, and organizational levels. The video can be effectively analyzed using a moves and turns framework to structure the discussion. Caitlin's Challenge, because it is set in an organizational context, can be used in management and leadership courses as well as in negotiation and conflict classes where instructors want to help students think about and practice what to do in real time. Accompanying the teaching note and video, we include a PowerPoint exemplar to teach Caitlin's Challenge.

 

Objectives:

  • The case illustrates the complexity of negotiating for oneself in an organization where there are significant power differentials and where the issues to be negotiated are often unclear and/or contested.
  • Students are invited to consider how a person prepares herself for a negotiation that has been contentious in the past and where there is not much of a negotiating track record.
  • The video provides an opportunity for students to observe different moves and turns.
  • The case provides an opportunity to discuss gender and how it might matter in these negotiations.

 

Camp Lemonnier

Scenario:

Camp Lemonnier is a United States Naval Expeditionary Base located in the African country of Djibouti. Djibouti, bordering Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, has been home to Camp Lemonnier since the September 11, 2001 attacks prompted the United States to seek a temporary staging ground for U.S. Marines in the region. Since then, Camp Lemonnier has expanded to nearly 500 acres and a base of unparalleled importance, in part because it is one of the busiest Predator drone bases outside of the Afghan warzone. Camp Lemonnier is home to the Combined Joint Task Force―Horn of Africa of the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM)—and is the only permanent U.S. military base in Africa.

Tensions between the two usually friendly nations took a turn after the crash of a U.S. Predator drone in the capital city of Djibouti. The United States Defense Attaché and the Djiboutian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs are meeting to renegotiate the terms of the lease contract for Camp Lemonnier. The negotiation will include the following issues: contract length, total lease payments per year, potential for renegotiation, economic development aid, and support for the local population, including staffing at the base.

Major lessons of this simulation include:

  • Defining BATNA: knowing your own BATNA will help you not accept a deal that is suboptimal to your likely walk-away alternative.
  • Understanding the Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA): By estimating the ZOPA prior to a negotiation you can avoid taking a deal that is worse for you than your next best (realistic) alternative.
  • The impact of culture in negotiation.
  • Process management and agenda setting.
  • Uncovering interests: integrative bargaining, or “mutual gain” negotiation, focuses on the idea that through careful preparation a negotiation outcome can be favorable for both sides.
  • Principal-agent dynamics.
  • Uncovering sources of power in negotiation.

This exercise is based on the real 2014 negotiations between the United States of America and the Republic of Djibouti. The Camp Lemonnier Case Study, which details the real-life negotiation, is available for purchase separately, and can be used either with this simulation or on its own.

Materials: 

  • General Instructions for all parties
  • Confidential Instructions for Djiboutian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs
  • Confidential Instructions for United States Defense Attaché
  • Results Form
  • Teaching Notes