Sharara Taha

217397985

Personal Development Case Study

Sharara Taha
217397985
ORGS 4560

P a g e 1 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

In this following paper, I will be showcasing the challenges I have faced during the

negotiations throughout this course and how I have worked towards managing such challenges

and overcoming them. I will show how I have learned throughout my negotiation exercises to be

better at negotiating and how to respond to different situations. As I believe I have a mixture of

competitive, cooperative, and individualistic nature as a negotiator, this has resulted in some

improvement overall. When I say I see three of these traits as a negotiator, I believe I mainly use

individualistic negotiation behavior when approaching, but I tend to change my patterns and

strategies in negotiation to match the energy and methods of the counterparty. I believe that my

fear of the unknown and the inability to gauge the counterparties' interests has led me to become

quite unemotional and seem very detached during the negotiations. Furthermore, I will be using

course materials to explain my strategies, thought processes, and negotiation methods throughout

this essay.

My negotiation personality

My negotiating style has evolved based on my previous experiences during negotiation

exercises; after the peer evaluation, I gain insight into how I performed on that exercise, and I

tend to focus on what went wrong and change my strategy to be completely opposite for the

upcoming exercise. According to my own analysis, even though my previous exercises dictate

my behavior or approach to my next negotiation, I tend to rely heavily on my competitive or

individualistic nature. Throughout my negotiations, I tend to look for more of my own benefit

rather than that of a counterparty, making me more competitive and individualistic rather than

cooperative. In other words, throughout my negotiations, I try to find a solution that benefits me

the most rather than the counterparty, and if the counterparty and I are both extremely

P a g e 2 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

competitive, only then am I willing to compromise and reach a middle ground but still try to get

the counterparty to agree to my terms and conditions.

I usually tend to take more of an aggressive and forceful approach – however, this wasn’t

the case in my first negotiation exercise – and I believe that this trait might have made me seem

more unapproachable and detached to my counterparties, as I was unable to come to a middle

ground and take the counterparty’s interests into consideration, which might have been an off-

putting experience for them. Therefore, I believe it is important for me to incorporate some

cooperative negotiation style to avoid this issue in the future. In addition, I am more of a person

to avoid failure than always try to succeed, and that’s why sometimes I tend to lose out on better

offers. I only see if I am succeeding rather than in comparison to my counterparty, even though I

believe I come across as very competitive to my peers. I think my mix of both an individualistic

and competitive nature can be quite confusing to people.

My strengths

One of my strongest aspects as a negotiator is my determination and ability to stand my

ground to get my part of the deal done and the drive to fulfil my interests. After my first few

negotiations, especially on my Sulamed internship negotiation, I was able to show my

determination towards reaching my goal. I was able to demonstrate to the counterparty that I was

adamant about what I required from them as an intern, and I even got a great long-term deal from

them. According to my peer, I was very determined during this negotiation, and my approach

towards this negotiation was strong as I was able to make the counterparty feel that they needed

something from me and that making a deal with me was only going to benefit her. Coming off

really strong like that helped in my case as I was able to achieve my target.

P a g e 3 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

Not only that, with the Bullard house negotiation, I was determined to get the

counterparty to agree with my conditions. I made them agree that my client was able to buy one

unit from the development and that there was no major reconstruction to be made to the existing

property, as my client was clear about that, and that they were able to pay the mortgage instead

of my client. With all this information, I seemed to be well prepared and the counterparty was

unable to take advantage of me as the information exchange was symmetrical. Additionally, my

tactic of keeping my interests in mind and having a lot of patience during negotiation has proved

to be beneficial as it gives me clarity and speaking about my interests to the counterparty directly

—as I had done during Bullard Houses—helped me achieve a more satisfactory result for

myself. 

I also believe that, initially, I may come off as too harsh and competitive to my peers, but

I am able to adapt to their demands and interests and reciprocate the energy of my counterparty.

This is known as the "reciprocity effect." Whenever I was paired with someone who was more

cooperative, the outcomes were satisfactory for both the teams (Thompson, 2020). However, in a

few negotiations when my counterparty and I cannot reach a solution, I tend to use different

intimidation strategies by bringing up information that the counterparty might not know and/or

having a strong BATNA, which puts the other party in a tough position. At Sulamed internship

and Bullard houses, I brought up information that they didn’t know and brought up my BATNA,

which really helped me to get the desired outcome, and I was able to get closer to my target price

and meet my interests.

My weakness

P a g e 4 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

While I do have strengths as a negotiator, I do have more weaknesses that I need to

overcome. My first weakness, that has been pointed out by many peers, is that I am not

empathetic or that I am unable to emotionally connect to the counterparty. I may come off as

distant and maybe even angry at times. During the Eazy’s Garage negotiation, my counterpart

thought that I was very stiff and aggressive in my approach. My aggression—which can

sometimes be translated into anger—proved to be a downfall for me and my "relationship" with

the counterparty, even though the outcome of this exercise was in my favor. However, in my

opinion, I can use my aggression and anger strategically to make the counterparty succumb to

my demands (Thompson, 2020). According to the readings, negotiators who are strategically

angry are more likely to get concessions from their adversary because the counterparty feels the

angry negotiator is close to their reservation point (Thompson, 2020). Angry negotiators instill

intimidation in their counterparts, and motivated counterparts are more inclined to yield. As a

result, negotiators who make a strategic flinch in the middle of a discussion can often win

(Thompson, 2020). A strategic flinch is a verbal or physical demonstration of astonishment,

contempt, or disbelief in response to an initial offer, and flinching negotiators claim more value

than non-flinching negotiators (Thompson, 2020). If I am able to master this skill and turn my

weaknesses—aggression and anger—into my positives and use them strategically, I will be able

to succeed in future negotiations.

My other weakness is that I always thought that negotiation was only about pie expansion

and division. I assumed that only the price mattered. I always believed that my peers’ interests

were always the opposite of mine (Thompson, 2020). Prior to the SulaMed Internship

negotiation – which had multiple issues to be addressed, it was an integrative negotiation – I had

the impression that all of my previous negotiations had been win-lose, with only one side

P a g e 5 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

receiving a larger share of the pie and triumphing over the other (Thompson, 2020). I was so

focused on the end result that I didn't notice any other underlying concerns that may have been

resolved throughout the negotiations. For example, during the coffee contract negotiation, I was

so focused on getting near to my goal price that I neglected to consider other contract concerns

that could have been addressed, such as delivery. My approach was the same with the BioPharm

and Seltek negotiations, where I was too focused on the price and didn’t even consider other

factors that could have been discussed and would have led to a more satisfactory result for me.

I saw that in many of my negotiations, I would regularly make compromises or

counteroffers in order to come close to my goal. As a result, the outcome of my previous

negotiation would have a continuous impact on my strategy and procedure in subsequent

exercises, causing me to perform poorly at times. I believe one way to overcome this weakness

of mine is to turn my focus to my reservation point and BATNA. "Focusing on reservation points

leads people to do worse but feel better" (Thompson, 2020). This is because if you agree to any

conclusion that is higher than your reservation point and better than your BATNA, you will not

be as focused on your target point and, as a result, be content with whatever agreement you

reach.

My favorite negotiation

Through so many negotiations, there were some that were extremely memorable and

really taught me a few things on how to be a better negotiator, and one such negotiation was the

Rooftop Deck negotiation. This was the first time we were required to work as a group for any

negotiation exercise, and I was paired up with a fellow classmate. Before meeting up with the

whole group for negotiation, we met up and discussed our strategies and even came up with

P a g e 6 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

backup plans by using our inductive reasoning and assuming what rebuttals the counterparty

could come up with and how we could provide them with information that would take them by

surprise (Thompson, 2020). We also decided to use intimidation strategies in the end with the

information we were told we had in the case and the other parties (Thompson, 2020). During the

final negotiation with all the counterparties together, my peer and I were able to convince both

the counterparties to meet our demands, and at the very end, when we got our counterparties to

agree to our terms and commit to the plan, we brought up the last clause that additional costs

would be paid by all, and at that moment, no one could back out of the deal. This negotiation

really taught me how to be really clever with negotiations and how to tackle different issues.

Conclusion

There have been many significant insights from my various negotiations, as well as the

lectures and readings that I have learned. One of the most important lessons I've learnt is to

always look for win-win situations. I need to have the perspective that there are no winners or

losers, but rather that "both sides of the table" might have winners. I shouldn’t just focus on

winning by myself but also think of the counterparty, because in real life, being this aggressive

and apathetic can ruin relationships. Additionally, it has been a great takeaway from many of my

peers that being aggressive will not lead to a successful negotiation, but being cooperative and

emotional will allow me to take a greater share of the pie (Thompson, 2020). Furthermore, for a

successful negotiation, both sides must figure out how to fill each other's "gaps" and offer value

to the relationship. In order to do so, all parties must make reasonable concessions and recognize

that certain issues may or may not be addressed. One approach to thinking about potential trade-

offs is for parties to concentrate on subjects that are of high value to one party but not to the

P a g e 7 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

other (Thompson, 2020). As a result, integrative agreements are reached when both parties

consider their counterparty's requirements rather than focus on defeating them.

Another important thing I've learned is the need for patience and active listening. During

several of my negotiations, I was eager to make concessions or completely disregard what the

counterparty was saying and not even consider satisfying the interests of the counterparty, as I

would only feign interest in their conversation, whereas I was too busy concentrating on

satisfying my own interests only. As a result, I had unfavorable outcomes. Thus, by taking the

time to absorb the information that my counterparty discloses, I am able to plan out my replies

and provide feasible choices that will benefit both parties.

Furthermore, preparation is the most vital component of every negotiation. To

successfully express your interests to your counterparty, you must first understand them. As a

result, by establishing your issues, target point, reservation point, alternatives, and BATNA

ahead of time, you'll give yourself the best chance of succeeding. So, when it comes to the real

negotiation, knowing your own position, as well as your partner's position on the issue and the

stakes, will help. Finally, because of my competitive and individualistic nature, I must recognize

that occasionally agreeing with my counterparty or being empathetic and understanding when

discussing their interests in order to obtain what I want might be beneficial. My inability to

empathize and take the counterparty’s interests into consideration is what I believe is holding me

back from being a good negotiator. In the future, I need to think of ways I can incorporate some

corporative tendencies along with my competitive and individualistic nature. I also need to

remember to tone down my aggression during negotiations, as this tends to work better in mixed-

motive negotiations. I have to read and understand how the counterparty is reacting, as

aggression is not beneficial when the counterparty is already being cooperative. To achieve a
P a g e 8 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

desired outcome, I need to be able to make use of my individualistic side and cooperative side in

balance.

Reference

Thompson, Leigh. 2020. Mind and Heart of the Negotiator (7th Edition). Pearson, 7th

Appendix

Diary entry

Exercise 1: Anderson coffee

I had completely confused the whole thing, the BATNA was already decided and I made

up my own prices. I have never been so confused about this task. The worst deal acceptable was

7.40 dollars I decided on my reservation price being 7.65. so basically I did it all wrong. I also

got manipulated by the facts and information provided to me by the seller and let them use my

BATNA against me. So I completely misunderstood the assignment and was very easily

manipulated by my counterparty.

Exercise 2: Biopharma and seltek

For this exercise I was cautious of setting the target and reservation price properly. This

time I took the approach of justifying my asking price. I made sure to give deals and offers that

really benefitted both me and Biopharma. I offered to give 35 of our employees and pay the

severance along with the tax. In my opinion I made a good deal and really brought out points to

justify the price I asked for. However, I didn’t push much for selling the patent to Biopharma,

because I thought it won’t be the best option to sell it to biopharma as they were not as willing to
P a g e 9 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

buy it. Whereas, other two companies were willing to buy it for a good price. I believe my failure

to do well in the previous exercise led me to be very cautious about this negotiation by

approaching it aggressively.

Exercise 3: Eazy’s garage

During this negotiation my approach was again very aggressive and I completely

disregarded the fact that the person who I’m supposed to be negotiating with is someone I know

for years. I was very adamant on the price and kept on repeating the same thing “I am not willing

to pay for something I had not approved of” which could’ve come across as too aggressive and

unreasonably repetitive. Even though I had information about the industry average I was unable

to gage a good midpoint for both counterparties.

Exercise 4: The SulaMed internship

In this case I played the role of the company doing the internships, and this was the first

case with multiple interests and issues to tackle. The negotiation went well and was in my favor

even though I had to pay a higher price than I was willing to. I was able to make a deal that also

benefitted me in the long-term as the intern was supposed to work permanently with us. Even

during this internship my approach was too strong and I seemed to be apathetic to my peer.

Exercise 5: Rooftop Deck

We had the role of Simpsons this time. This was the first negotiation as a group Before

meeting up with the whole group for negotiation we met up and discussed our strategies and

even came up with backup plans by using our inductive reasoning and assuming what rebuttals

the counterparty could come up with and how we can provide with information that will take

them by surprise. During the final negotiation with all the counterparties together, my peer and I
P a g e 10 | 11
Sharara Taha
217397985

were able to convince both the counterparties to meet our demands and at the very end when we

got our counterparties to agree to our terms ad commit to the plan we brought up the last clause

that additional costs will be paid by all, and at that moment no one could back out from the deal.

Exercise 6: Bullard house

In this negotiation I played the role of the seller of the Bullard houses. I was representing

the Bullard houses and was required to meet their conditions. We had BATNAs but it didn’t

satisfy the owners as they did not want the building and certain zones to be taken down, this

clause was more important to them than the price. I had to keep this in mind and move forward.

In this negotiation I was comparatively more cooperative than any of the previous negotiations

and was able to satisfy the needs of the counterparty as well. However, I still managed to stand

my ground in the negotiation and make sure a lot of my clauses are being met.

P a g e 11 | 11