Hal MoviusTwo-party negotiation between representatives of Viatex and one of its clients, Brattlebury, involving trade-offs between short and long-term gains as well as dealing with internal stakeholders.
Brattlebury Corporation manufactures a range of pharmaceutical, nutritional, and medical products for which Viatex supplies plastic bottles. The relationship between the two companies has existed for 10 years and both parties are satisfied with it thus far however Brattlebury is under pressure recently to cut costs due to less than stellar sales. After examining means to cut corporate costs, Brattlebury discovered that its RFP process was highly inefficient and cost both Brattlebury and Viatex significant amounts of time in drawing up a proposal every two years.
It is difficult to create value when you discuss issues one by one, and when you and your negotiating partner are focused on articulating positions rather than interests.
In general, it makes sense to share your own interests, and persuade your partner to tell you his or hers by asking why he or she prefers specific options, and how he or she values different issues.
The opportunity to create value arises when you and your partner discover (by sharing interests) that you care about different things to different degrees, and you can trade across those differences.
Even when parties disagree about what a fair outcome would be, there is usually room for interpretation and negotiation on what standard of fairness the parties should use.
Aspirations can undo or facilitate a negotiation, depending on where they are set and how adjustable they are to new information.
Parties’ satisfaction levels may not be correlated to the total value they created; process and relationship/ rapport are also key determinants of how satisfied the parties are at the end of a negotiation.
Subjective satisfaction can change drastically if or when parties become aware of less-than-forthcoming behavior by their counterparts, or aware of opportunities for gain that were missed.
Participant materials include:
General instructions for both parties
Confidential instructions for Brattlebury
Confidential instructions for Viatex
- Time required::
- 2 hours
- Teams involved::
- Agent present::
- Neutral third-party present::
- Teaching Notes::
- Hal Movius
PON Teaching Negotiation Resource Center
Soft copy vs. hard copy
You may order this role simulation in either soft copy (electronic) or hard copy (paper) format. If you select the soft copy option, you will receive an e-mail with a URL (website address) from which you may download an electronic file in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. You will have one week to download your materials from when you receive the email. You are then only authorized to use, print, or share the materials as many times as the number of copies you purchase. The TNRC charges for use of this simulation on a per-participant basis. Therefore, you must purchase a separate copy of this simulation for each person who will be participating, regardless of the number of roles in the simulation. You will only receive a link to one electronic file, which includes all general instructions, confidential instructions, and any teaching notes for the simulation. You should separate out the instructions before distributing to participants.
If you select the hard copy option, you will receive paper copies of this role simulation via the shipping method you select.
For additional information about the soft copy option, please visit our FAQ section, or contact the PON Teaching Negotiation Resource Center at firstname.lastname@example.org or 800-258-4406 (within the U.S.) or 301-528-2676 (outside the U.S.).
Please note: At the present time, Teaching Negotiation Resource Center soft copies are compatible with the following versions of the Adobe Acrobat Reader: English, German, French, Spanish, Swedish, Portuguese, Japanese, and Korean. If you have a different version of the Acrobat Reader, you may wish to download one of these at http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html, or contact the PON Teaching Negotiation Resource Center at email@example.com, 800-258-4406 (within the U.S.), or 301-528-2676 (outside the U.S.) for further assistance. This restriction does not apply to the freely available Teacher’s Package Review Copies.
Ordering a single copy for review
If you wish to review the materials for a particular role simulation to decide whether you’d like to use it, a PDF, or soft copy, version of the Teacher’s Package for the simulation is available as a free download from the description page of most role simulations and case studies. All Teacher’s Packages include copies of all participant materials. In addition, some Teacher’s Packages (but not all) include additional teaching materials such as teaching notes or overhead masters.
Ordering copies for multiple participants
To order multiple copies of a role simulation for use in a course or workshop, simply enter the total number of participants in the box next to “Quantity.” There is no need to calculate how many of each role is required.
If you are ordering hard copies, the Teaching Negotiation Resource Center will calculate the appropriate numbers of each role to provide, based on the total number of participants. For example, if you wish to order a 2-party role simulation for use with a class of 30 students, you would enter “30” in the box next to “Quantity.” You then would receive 15 copies of one role and 15 copies of the other role, for use with your 30 participants. As another example, if you ordered 30 participant copies of a 6-party role simulation, you would receive 5 copies of each role.
In the event that the number of participant copies you order is not evenly divisible by the number of roles in the simulation, you will receive extra copies of one or more roles. Participants receiving the extra roles may partner with other participants playing the same role, thus negotiating as a team. So, for instance, if you ordered 31 copies of a 2-party role simulation, you would receive 15 copies of the first role and 16 copies of the second role. One of the participants playing the second role would partner with another participant playing that same role, and the two would negotiate as a team.