Distributive Tactics Analysis_Coffee Contract

docx

School

University of California, Irvine *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

255

Subject

Economics

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by JusticeDiscovery15768

Report
Tianchan Luo Distributive Tactics Analysis - Coffee Contract Key Event 1: The Bargaining Zone In the coffee contract negotiation, I observed a critical event, the emergence of a bargaining zone problem, which led to the no-deal outcome, particularly in Statler Hotel’s approach. Salter’s rigid stance, characterized by a refusal to counteroffer, highlighted a lack of flexibility and an over-reliance on their target point. This is very inflexibility, which results in negotiation impasses; this shows one of the key concepts from our reading: the importance of recognizing and operating within the Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA), which also leads to the overconfidence and lack of research of the other party’s BATNA and their reservation point. Statler’s obsession with its target point, without considering Anderson’s position (the shipping cost, etc.) of the reservation point, exemplifies the critical misstep in the negotiation. (Note: Anderson’s counteroffer was what I wrote as their reservation point.) I will emphasize flexibility and research around ZOPA to avoid similar pitfalls in future negotiations. I intend to prepare counter-proposals that acknowledge the other party’s perspective, considering how the counterparty thinks about the negotiation and their pain point. This approach should create a more collaborative negotiation atmosphere and pervert the deadlock, using the principle of reciprocity to ask for concessions from the other side, potentially leading to a win-win negotiation where both parties are satisfied. This also helps with my reputation for long-term future opportunities.
Key Event 2: the Chilling Effect Another pivotal moment was the chilling effect when Statler Hotel undervalued the product or was unwilling to show it by referring to it as “IT’S JUST BLACK COFFEE” and offering a price well below Anderson’s reservation point. This approach undermined the product’s value and signaled a lack of thorough research into Anderson’s needs and market position. Understanding the other party’s reservation point and respect is critical; showing interest is a fundamental negotiation concept. Statler’s disregard with an extreme offer is a hazardous strategy, which leads to the other party being offended and even walking away from the table with no deal. In my future negotiations, I will conduct comprehensive research to understand the other party’s needs, constraints, and reservation points with respect. By doing so, I can make informed offers more likely to be within their acceptance range. Additionally, I will avoid diminishing the other party’s position or products, as this can adversely affect the negotiation climate and outcomes. Additional insights: Precise versus Round Numbers Another observation worth noting is Statler’s use of a precise total dollar amount in the offer; this static aligns with the concept of “precise anchoring,” suggesting the negotiators are more prepared, informed, and credible.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help