67 Fish Pond Lane

SCENARIO:

67 Fish Pond Lane in Cambridge, MA was purchased five years ago for $95,000 by two lawyers. Since then, its value has at least doubled. The owners, expecting to stay for some time, kept the house in excellent condition and added several unique features, including an elegant high-tech aviary for exotic birds. The owners recently moved to California, however, and the house has been on the market for a month. Two graduating business school students are interested in purchasing the house. One or both of them plan to meet with one or both of the owners while the latter are in town for a few days to see if a sale can be arranged.

MECHANICS:

The exercise is a little more natural as a one-on-one negotiation with absent partners, but two-on-two negotiations also work and provide some interesting team dynamics. All instructions are neutral as to sex and marital status.

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • Map

 

Role specific:
Confidential Instructions for:

  • Buyer(s)
  • Seller(s)

 

Teacher’s Package:

  • All of the above
  • Teaching note

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • This exercise usually generates difficult negotiations. In this familiar context the stakes seem large, and while there are many objective criteria on point, they are neither fully consistent nor determinative. The tendency to haggle is strong, and a variety of bargaining tactics can be used. Review can explore which tactics were effective under what circumstances, and why.
  • Many important concerns and legitimate criteria in the case are intangible and/or difficult to measure. This raises the question of how arguments can persuasively be turned into numbers.
  • The exercise is a good one for focusing closely on what specific events cause parties to change their offers, and what brings them to the point of closing the deal.
  • A discussion of deadlines, their effects and how to create them, is usually appropriate.
  • Comparison of results also raises questions about what techniques, attitudes and tactics produce more competition and/or animosity? How does amicability correlate with pareto optimality of results?
  • A variety of questions are raised concerning the concept of BATNA. How does a party’s perception of its BATNA affect conduct in the negotiation? How should it? How can BATNAs be improved? When is it ethical to try to change the other side’s BATNA for the worse? When not? What are some ways of doing that?
  • This exercise also facilitates a rich post-mortem consideration of how the parties might have prepared better.

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Anchoring; BATNA; Bluffing; Closure; Commitment; Fairness; Information exchange; Interests, dovetailing; Interests, quantifying; Joint gains; Legitimacy; Misrepresentation; Objective criteria; Offers, first; Reservation price; Systems of negotiation

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:

 

Big Pipeline in Swagwit

SCENARIO:

Big Pipeline, a construction company, is building a pipeline through land owned by First Nation (Native American) peoples. Twenty years ago, a similar project by the same company left many of the indigenous peoples feeling dissatisfied and unhappy – this has resulted in tensions in this current negotiation. Happily, most of the issues between the Mountain Home Band, the group of First Nations people who will be the most affected, and Big Pipeline have been worked out. One major issue remains – allocation of job opportunities. How many laborers should be used for the construction project and how many of these jobs should be reserved for Mountain Home Band people?

 

MAJOR LESSONS:

It is possible to negotiate agreements that create gains for you and for them–you can both beat your BATNA. To create joint gains, use the Mutual Gains Approach:

  • Know your own BATNA and interests
  • Set your aspirations
  • Communicate your interests, and probe for their interests
  • Trade across issues you value differently
  • Use standards you can both accept to help you choose among options and packages

 

Manage the opportunities and dangers involved in setting aspirations:

  • Set your aspirations high
  • Be responsive to new information; don't be rigid.
  • When you do adjust your aspirations, be careful not to leave value unclaimed.
  • Help your partner do the same.

 

Negotiate as if relationships mattered:

  • Don't jeopardize long-term relationships by pushing too hard for short-term gain.
  • Effective "cross-cultural" negotiation depends upon making sure you are understood (and understand).
  • The rewards of modest risk-taking can be substantial. There will always be tension between the advantages of cooperation and the need to "compete."
  • Good negotiators develop a repertoire of negotiating styles.
  • You have to talk about relationships to improve them.

 

MECHANICS:

This negotiation may be run within 30 minutes with a 10 minute prep-time. You should allow at least 20 minutes for debriefing

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role specific:

  • Big Pipeline Project Manager + score sheet
  • Mountain Home Band Chief + score sheet

 

Additional Teaching Notes:

  • Summary of 'lessons learned'
  • Summary score sheet for 120 players
  • Chart of possible scores

Harborco

NEW – ALL-IN-ONE CURRICULUM PACKAGE 

If you are looking to go in-depth on the fundamental negotiation concepts and track learning outcomes, the Harborco All-In-One Curriculum Package will provide you with everything you need. The All-In-One Curriculum Package makes it easy to teach negotiation and includes materials for the instructor as well as for students.

Materials include: 

  • Instructor’s Guide – Guide for instructors on negotiation concepts, simulation logistics, and debriefing simulation participants.
  • Instructor Background Reading List – List of background readings for instructors to complete before using the simulation to gain a better understanding of the negotiation concepts.
  • Student Background Reading List – List of background readings for students to complete before the simulation to gain understanding of the negotiation concepts.
  • Confidential Role Instructions – Confidential role-specific materials for participants in the exercise.
  • Pre-Negotiation Surveys – After completing the background reading and/or presentation of the negotiation concepts, participants complete the online Pre-Negotiation Survey to benchmark their understanding of the key learning points the game is intended to teach.
  • Agreement Outcome Form – Participants reporting the results of any agreements reached in the simulation.
  • Post-Negotiation Survey – After finishing the simulation, but before the debrief, participants fill out the Post-Negotiation Survey so Instructors can gauge participants understanding of the issues and concepts.
  • Class PowerPoint Presentation – The first part of the PowerPoint slide deck is for the instructor to use to introduce negotiation concepts, how to participate in a negotiation simulation, and Harborco. The second part is for the instructor to use in debriefing the simulation with participants.
  • Feedback Survey – At the conclusion of the exercise, participants can give feedback on the process and outcomes.

To order this package, you must purchase a minimum of ten copies. A separate copy must be purchased for every participant in the exercise. The materials are all single use and must be re-purchased for subsequent uses.

SCENARIO:

Harborco is a consortium of development, industrial, and shipping concerns interested in building and operating a deepdraft port. It has already selected a site for the port, but cannot proceed without a license from the Federal Licensing Agency (FLA). The FLA is willing to grant Harborco a license, but only if it secures the support of at least 4 of 5 other parties: the environmental coalition, the federation of labor unions, a consortium of other ports in the region, the Federal Department of Coastal Resources (DCR), and the Governor of the host state. The parties have several issues to negotiate before deciding whether or not to approve the port, including the types of industries that will be be permitted to locate near the port, the extent to which environmental damage be mitigated, the extent to which organized labor will be given preference in hiring during construction and operation of the port, the amount of any federal financial assistance to Harborco, and the amount of any compensation to other ports in the region for potential economic losses?

 

MECHANICS:

This game is best played with 12 people (2 per role) although 6 people also works. A game manager is needed to conduct periodic votes and to answer questions. Game instructions require at least 30 minutes to read; more preparation is helpful. Negotiations require a minimum of 2 hours. However, the more time allowed for negotiation, the better.

 

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. Very few groups will reach unanimous (6-way) agreement.
  • Players are exposed to elementary utility analysis in the point scoring scheme. The importance of pre-negotiation analysis in evaluating options is illustrated. The players can then explore how and why different negotiating strategies led to different outcomes.
  • Multi-issue, multi-party negotiations tend to involve the formation of coalitions–especially blocking coalitions. This game provides an instructive context for exploring coalition strategies.
  • Parties that reveal their true interests do not necessarily do better than those who remain silent or bluff. The advantages and disadvantages of revealing all one’s concerns are illustrated in this game.
  • Pareto-superior and Pareto-inferior agreements are illustrated by the scores.
  • When 12 players play the game (2 per role) they have an opportunity to explore the special difficulties of negotiations involving non-monolithic parties.
  • The need for a neutral “process manager” of some sort is also illustrated, as the parties struggle to structure their discussions.
  • The advantages of caucusing can be explored. In some cases, players will initiate caucuses; in others, they will avoid private caucusing.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Role specific:
Confidential Instructions to the Negotiator for:

  • Harborco
  • Other Ports
  • Environmental League
  • Union
  • Federal DCR
  • Governor

 

Teacher’s package (67 pages total):

  • All of the above
  • Teaching Note
  • Game Review Chart

 

Please note that this exercise is included in the Resolving Public Disputes package, also available through the Clearinghouse.

 

PROCESS THEMES:

Agenda control; Authority; BATNA; Bluffing; Caucusing; Coalitions; Commitment; Communication; Competition v. Cooperation; Constituents; Delay tactics; Information exchange; Joint gains; Media; Mediation; Meeting design; Misrepresentation; Monolithic vs. non-monolithic parties; Objective criteria; Offers, first; Pareto optimization; Political constraints, dealing with; Pressure tactics; Reservation price; Systems of negotiation; Time constraints; Utility analysis

Sally Soprano I

NEW – ALL-IN-ONE CURRICULUM PACKAGE 

If you are new to teaching negotiation or are looking to go in-depth on the fundamental negotiation concepts, the Sally Soprano All-In-One Curriculum Package will provide you with everything you need to teach negotiation.

The All-In-One Curriculum Package makes it easy to teach negotiation, track learning outcomes, and includes materials for the instructor as well as for students.

Materials include: 

  • Instructor’s Guide – Guide for instructors on negotiation concepts, simulation logistics, and debriefing simulation participants.
  • Instructor Background Reading List – List of background readings for instructors to complete before using the simulation to gain a better understanding of the negotiation concepts.
  • Student Background Reading List – List of background readings for students to complete before the simulation to gain understanding of the negotiation concepts.
  • Confidential Role Instructions – Confidential role-specific materials for participants in the exercise.
  • Pre-Negotiation Surveys – After completing the background reading and/or presentation of the negotiation concepts, participants complete the online Pre-Negotiation Survey to benchmark their understanding of the key learning points the game is intended to teach.
  • Agreement Outcome Form – Participants reporting the results of any agreements reached in the simulation.
  • Post-Negotiation Survey – After finishing the simulation, but before the debrief, participants fill out the Post-Negotiation Survey so Instructors can gauge participants understanding of the issues and concepts.
  • Class PowerPoint Presentation – The first part of the PowerPoint slide deck is for the instructor to use to introduce negotiation concepts, how to participate in a negotiation simulation, and Sally Soprano. The second part is for the instructor to use in debriefing the simulation with participants.
  • Feedback Survey – At the conclusion of the exercise, participants can give feedback on the process and outcomes.

The Sally Soprano All-In-One Curriculum Package requires a minimum of 90 minutes of class time, but is best run in a two and half or three-hour class. To order this package, you must purchase a minimum of ten copies. A separate copy must be purchased for every participant in the exercise. The materials are all single use and must be re-purchased for subsequent uses.

SCENARIO

Sally Soprano is a distinguished soprano who is now somewhat past her prime. She has not had a lead role in two years but would like to revive her career. The Lyric Opera has a production scheduled to open in three weeks, but its lead soprano has become unavailable. Lyric’s representative has requested a meeting with Sally’s agent to discuss the possibility of hiring Sally for the production. Neither knows much about the other’s interests or alternatives. There is a wide range of possible outcomes.

NOTE This exercise is a modified version of the exercise Sally Swansong I, developed by Norbert S. Jacker and Mark N. Gordon. Sally Swansong I is still available upon request. The Spanish, Swedish, and Dutch translations are based on the original Sally Swansong exercise. See also Theotis Wiley, a variation of this simulation set in the context of a potential endorsement contract between a basketball player and an athletic shoe company.

TEACHING MATERIALS 

Materials for the standard version include:

  • Confidential Instructions for:
    • Sally Soprano’s Agent
    • Lyric Opera’s Business Manager
  • Post-negotiation handouts:
    • Some possible criteria for establishing salary
    • Some creative options
  • Teacher’s Package includes:
    • All of the above
    • Teaching Note

PROCESS THEMES Anchoring; Attorney/Client relations; Authority; BATNA; Bluffing; Confidentiality; Constituents; Fairness; Information exchange; Interests, dovetailing; Lawyering; Legitimacy; Meaning of “success”; Misrepresentation; Objective criteria; Offers, first; Options, generating; Pareto optimization; Precedents; Risk aversion; Risk perception; Systems of negotiation; Trust

MAJOR LESSONS

This exercise is an excellent vehicle for comparing principled negotiation and positional bargaining.

The knowledge that one’s BATNA is weak often leads people to negotiate much less vigorously than they otherwise would. Is this ever justified? If so, under what conditions? The case affords a good opportunity to point out that any such analyses should be based on a consideration of the parties’ relative BATNAs.

The available data allow a number of more or less equally persuasive arguments about what a “fair” salary would be. This is at a minimum good practice in developing and using objective criteria. Beyond that, the case presents the more difficult challenge of finding an objective basis with which to judge the applicability of alternative objective criteria.

Good negotiators put the distributive issues in this case in perspective and reduce their importance by dovetailing interests with creative options that expand the pie. This case has an enormous potential range of such creative options.

Since the case does have a strong competitive element, there is ample opportunity to explore techniques for indirectly and directly extracting information from the other side. Likewise, techniques of protecting oneself from “giving up” the possibility for gains that were unforeseen can be explored and discussed.

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS

 

ENHANCED VERSION AVAILABLE

A digitally enhanced version of this simulation is available through the iDecisionGames platform and includes the following features:

  • An Instructor’s Guide summarizing the negotiation concepts covered in the simulation, a quick review of simulation logistics, and a ready-to-use set of debriefing slides;
  • Highlights from background readings that will help both students and instructors gain a better understanding of negotiation concepts and methods covered in the simulation;
  • Pre- and post-simulation questionnaires instructors can use gauge each student’s grasp of the core concepts before and after participating in the simulation;
  • PowerPoint slides that introduce key concepts before the simulation and highlight lessons for debriefing;
  • Real time, interactive, data analytics provided via the iDecisionGames platform.

To order the Sally Soprano Enhanced Package click here.

Three-Party Coalition Exercise

NEW – ALL-IN-ONE CURRICULUM PACKAGE 

If you are new to teaching negotiation or are looking to go in-depth on the fundamental negotiation concepts, the Three-Party Coalition All-In-One Curriculum Package will provide you with everything you need to teach negotiation.

The All-In-One Curriculum Package makes it easy to teach negotiation, track learning outcomes, and includes materials for the instructor as well as for students.

Materials include: 

  • Instructor’s Guide – Guide for instructors on negotiation concepts, simulation logistics, and debriefing simulation participants.
  • Instructor Background Reading List – List of background readings for instructors to complete before using the simulation to gain a better understanding of the negotiation concepts.
  • Student Background Reading List – List of background readings for students to complete before the simulation to gain understanding of the negotiation concepts.
  • Confidential Role Instructions – Confidential role-specific materials for participants in the exercise.
  • Pre-Negotiation Surveys – After completing the background reading and/or presentation of the negotiation concepts, participants complete the online Pre-Negotiation Survey to benchmark their understanding of the key learning points the game is intended to teach.
  • Agreement Outcome Form – Participants reporting the results of any agreements reached in the simulation.
  • Post-Negotiation Survey – After finishing the simulation, but before the debrief, participants fill out the Post-Negotiation Survey so Instructors can gauge participants understanding of the issues and concepts.
  • Class PowerPoint Presentation – The first part of the PowerPoint slide deck is for the instructor to use to introduce negotiation concepts, how to participate in a negotiation simulation, and Three-Party Coalition. The second part is for the instructor to use in debriefing the simulation with participants.
  • Feedback Survey – At the conclusion of the exercise, participants can give feedback on the process and outcomes.

To order this package, you must purchase a minimum of ten copies. A separate copy must be purchased for every participant in the exercise. The materials are all single use and must be re-purchased for subsequent uses.

SCENARIO:

Three independent organizations, “A,” “B” and “C,” have sent representatives to a three-way negotiation. The representatives have learned that there are benefits to working together. If all three groups reach an agreement, benefits totaling 121 points will be split three ways (to be determined by the participants). If only two of the organizations reach an agreement, the total benefits to be split will be less than 121 (varying, depending on which two organizations join together) and the third party will be left with nothing.

You can see students practicing the Three-Party Coalition Exercise negotiation game in this free video:

MAJOR LESSONS:

  • The concept of BATNA can be examined, since each participant has the information he or she needs to calculate the expected value of various deals.
  • The power of seemingly “weak” players can be enhanced through the creation of blocking coalitions.
  • When played by several groups at the same time, the comparison of outcomes is effective.
  • The exercise can also be used to raise questions about the basis for arbitrating multi-party disputes.

 

ADDITIONAL NOTES:

For more information on the lessons of this game, see Howard Raiffa’s book “The Art and Science of Negotiation” (Harvard University Press), also available from the TNRC.

 

MECHANICS:

Time Requirements:

  • This exercise is designed for three participants. Preparation should take 5-10 minutes. Negotiations require 15-20 minutes; more time is useful.

 

Facility Needs:

  • Room with seating for multiple groups of 3. An overhead transparency projector is useful since some of the materials include transparencies.

 

TEACHING MATERIALS:

For all parties:

  • General Instructions

 

Teacher’s Package:

  • All of the above
  • Teaching Note
  • Overhead transparency masters

 

KEYWORDS/ THEMES:

BATNA; Closure; Coalitions; Competition v. Cooperation; Creativity; Currently perceived choice analysis; Decision analysis; Options, generating; Quantitative analysis

 

SIMILAR SIMULATIONS:

The Parking Facility Venture

Social Services

Rushing River Cleanup