Observation & Analysis Paper #2

Negotiation 1: Play and Negotiation

For this negotiation we were put into pairs and given the task of filling an imaginary ball pit with
varying coloured balls. Each participant was given a differing value of each ball depending on its
colour and number of balls placed in the pit. This negotiation focused primarily on the
relationship between the two parties and, depending on the approach each individual party took,
could have either gone very smoothly, or both parties could have experienced extreme conflict as
they both vied for the most amount of points. It was up to the discretion of the individual how
honest they were to be in their dealing and to what level they shared and exchanged information
regarding how much each ball number/colour was valued for them. My partner and I decided to
take a very integrated approach and saw it in each other’s best interest to freely share information
in hopes that we could both achieve the maximum number of points each in a smooth conflict-
free as possible manner. We were able, as expected, to reach a favourable outcome for the
negotiation relatively quickly, with myself gaining 850 points and my partner gaining 840. This
is mainly due to, despite only having an acquaintance-level relationship, the high levels of trust
my partner and I approached the negotiation with, resulting in cooperative behaviour for the
whole duration of the negotiation.
Studies show that greater information sharing enhances the effectiveness in achieving a good
negotiation outcome, this proved true in our case as we both were able to achieve the maximum
possible points each without negatively affecting the others outcome. The driving force behind
our integrative approach was the value that we placed on the intangible aspect of the relationship
between the two of us, the high value placed on the relationship encouraged both parties to not
only value our own outcome but each other outcome as well, resulting in high levels of
cooperation which allowed us to reach an end agreement in a timely and smooth manner.

Negotiation 2: The Internship

This negotiation was between a company, SulaMed, and a candidate for an internship offered by
this company. My group represented the candidate, we had an existing internship offer from
another company, Turalong, which offered $13,500 salary for a division C job in Seattle for the
duration of 15th May to 15th August. Our main concerns going into this negotiation was the
 Observation & Analysis Paper #2

duration of the internship, the location, salary, housing expenses, division and signing bonus.
Each of these points of concern had a $ value on them, with our existing internship offer having
an overall value of $17 500.
My group and I decided to take an open and integrative approach to the negotiation. We
recognised that we held less power in the situation and if the negotiation was to go well we
would be working at this company, meaning the in tangible aspects such as our relationship with
the company was also very important to us.
Our BATNA was an overall internship value of $17 500 (our current internship offer), however
we were flexible at how we achieved that value in regard to salary, start date, location etc.
However, our ultimate target was a duration of May 15th-August 15th, location of Seattle, full
housing expenses, division S and ideally a salary of around $16 000. Recognising that we were
in a lesser position to make demands as we did not know how badly the company wanted us to
intern we decided to allow the company to make the first offer, hoping to identify what aspects
they valued most. The other party also seemed to take a more integrative rather than distributive
approach to the negotiation, however it was evident that they did not have a proper negotiating
plan. Because of this there was no real allocation of concessions on their part and regular breaks
were taken to get affairs in order. As a result of this confusion and disorganisation, concession
making was not used to our advantage, despite clearly labelling our concessions, we were not
able to break them up into instalments, ultimately resulting in many opportunities being missed.
Rather than having multiple small concessions both parties went straight into both extremes of
what their ultimate goal was, whilst it did even out slightly (for example the location and housing
expenses) our party, if not both parties, could’ve gained more by using smaller but consistent
concessions. It was also evident that the other party dominated the conversation, mostly due to
their lack of organisation, which also played into our disadvantage.
Throughout the negotiation we made known that Seattle was very important to us and as a result
for not gaining Seattle we gained full housing expense coverage ($1000 higher than value of
Seattle, $5000 total). It was evident that both parties were eager to end the negotiation due to the
clouding disorganisation and confusion and frequent long breaks. This resulted in a quick throw-
in of an extra $1000 in salary for the candidate to appease both sides so that a settlement could
be reached, suggesting that the company had a lot more room to move and that the candidate was
likely on the losing end of the deal with less than what they could’ve had.
 Observation & Analysis Paper #2

Despite of all this there was an overall good sense of trust between both parties, mostly due to
the integrative approach taken, resulting in good cooperation. In the end we settled on a duration
of May 15th – August 15th, location of Omaha, Division S, $11 000 salary with $5000 being
paid upfront and $5000 in housing expenses, resulting in an overall value of $18 500 for the
internship at SulaMed, $1000 more in value to the internship at Turalong.