Negotiation Analysis
Question 1: Analyze the opening of the negotiation and discuss your observations in relation to rapport building ((POWERPOINT DAY 2)), positioning, and tactics.
Negotiation refers to the collaborative process utilized by different individuals in the pursuit of the best solution available for everyone involved. Successful negotiation follows a given process that begins with preparation and planning, defining ground rules, clarification and justification, problem-solving, and closure of the negotiation process. The negotiation between Erin and Donna Jensen on behalf of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) followed the due negotiation process that began with preparation and planning and ended with closure and implementation.
Erin played a critical role in building positive rapport with Donna Jensen. Erin did this by visiting Donna Jensen with the aim of understanding the medical records in the files presented to her by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) (Anon, 2011). During her visit, Erin employed different tactics that include binding arbitration to help quicken the settlement period. Additionally, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) employed the use of incentives in the form of free doctor for the community affected by the contaminated water to ensure that everyone gets medication and ensure that everyone remains calm during the negotiation process (Anon, 2011). These incentives helped build positive relations between the negotiating parties as they aim to reach an amicable conclusion satisfactory to both parties.
Question 2: Identify and discuss the negotiation strategy and style being adopted in the video. Short answer for this one
The negotiation strategy and style being adopted in the video is the competitive strategy. This style commonly referred to as a win-lose strategy, happens in a negotiation situation where one party attaches more importance to their winning compared to the victory of the other party involved. In the video, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) can be said to only care about its winning and not the health of the 634 plaintiffs who are being affected by the carcinogenic hexavalent chromium found in groundwater utilized by Hinkley residents. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Question 3: Identify and discuss the effectiveness of the negotiation tactics adopted by each party in the video. Quote directly from the transcript to support your argument. MORE WORDS
The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) utilized the hard approach negotiation tactic to come to a conclusion. This tactic involves the utilization of extreme competitive bargaining. The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) attach more importance to its winning compared to the winning of the other party involved. This is true because Mr. Foil, who acts as the speaker of the organization, argue that “our offer is final and more than fair.” (Anon, 2011) Their offer to the affected party is $250,000, and that offer was the final offer and non-negotiable. This showed personification and self-care and helped the organization make a deal that was beneficial to them without caring for the repercussions of the conclusion made to the other party in the organization.
Donna Jensen, on the other hand, utilized the soft approach negotiation tactic to come to a conclusion. This tactic entails yielding of one party to the demands of the other party involved in the negotiation. Donna Jensen tries hard to meet the interest of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) while forgetting about their interests. This can be seen in the video where Erin “returns to Hinkley and persuades all 634 plaintiffs to go along” with the plan. The residents of Hinkley are willing recipients of the help received from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). They accept their offer of $250,000 as settlement and also accept to be treated by a doctor sent to them by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) (Anon, 2011). This showed their willingness to participate in the terms brought forward by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) during the negotiation process.
Question 4: Identify and name the moves and turns in the negotiation. MORE WORDS
The negotiation between Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and Donna Jensen utilized several moves and turned in the negotiation to make the negotiation process a success. The first move in the negotiation made by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) was appealing for sympathy and flattery (Kolb and Williams, 2014). The organization was critical of the accusation made by Donna Jensen and the residents of Hinkley regarding the contamination of water. This move was critical of the ideas presented by Donna Jensen in the negotiation. Appealing for sympathy by the organization was critical in helping the organization get the desired results through reaching to the inner feelings of the Hinkley residents.
Another move employed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) was the making of threats to the residents of Hinkley (Kolb and Williams, 2014). The threats played a critical role in forcing the residents of Hinkley into accepting the choices made by the organization regarding the negotiation procedure. In the video negotiation, Mr. Foil threatened Ed with the settlement amount the organization was willing to pay. Mr. Foil asserted power over Ed, thus backing him to a corner, forcing him to accept the $250,000 compensation as fair enough price for the residents of Hinkley (Kolb and Williams, 2014).
Additionally, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) employ demeaning of ideas as a move in the negotiation. The organization does this by refusing to accept the notion and the idea that $250,000 was not enough compensation for the residents of Hinkley (Kolb and Williams, 2014). Mr. Foil argued that he understands the health issues suffered by the residents of Hinkley but refuses to be drawn to the idea that their health complications are a result of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) operations (Kolb and Williams, 2014).
The first turn made Ed during the negotiation process with Mr. Foil from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) was constant interruptions (Kolb and Williams, 2014). The constant interruptions disrupt the move of the negotiation, thus taking people to different shifts and dynamics in the negotiation. Ed accomplished this by continually asking in between questions during his conversations with the organization’s representatives, Mr. Foil. For example, in one of their conversations, when Mr. Foil argued that $250,000 was more than enough in terms of compensation, Ed interrupted by arguing that that amount was so small to cover for the medical expenses of the affected (Kolb and Williams, 2014).
Question 5: What do you believe are the interests of each party in this negotiation? Given you have limited information, you will need to make some assumptions.
From the video presented, I believe the interests of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) lie on the profits enjoyed by the company through the residents of Hinkley. The interests of the organization lie in purchasing the home of Donna Jensen, who is a resident of Hinkley, California. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) aims at purchasing this home to help keep its business operation afloat. The home of Donna Jensen who is a resident of Hinkley California is directly affected by the polluted water from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), and the organization aims at purchasing the home to help cover up their role in the illnesses taking root in Hinkley California as a result of the populated water. Buying this home will ensure the vacation of people from Hinkley, thus ensuring the organization keeps its operations going without affecting the health of the residents and without constant lawsuits being filed regarding the contamination water against the firm.
Donna Jensen and other residents of Hinkley California had their interest entirely focused on getting proper medication for the illnesses taking root in their community as a result of contamination in their only source of water. Additionally, their interest lies in stopping water contamination and suing the organization for the damages caused as a result of the contamination. The residents are hoping for a closure of the firm as well as compensation for damages caused as a result of water contamination.
Question 6: What role are emotions playing in the negotiation? Body language, are our emotions playing role, what are they (anger, happiness, etc.… you got three people to analyze
Emotions play a critical role in negotiations. Behavior, thoughts, body language, and underlying biology all play a critical role when it comes to negotiation. Basic emotions triggered by the negotiations affect the outcome of the negotiation process. For example, from the video, Mr. Foil is angry with the way the negotiation process is going, and it affects the negotiations. His anger leaves no room to listen to Ed and his findings in the negotiations, and this affects the outcome by focusing the outcome on the beliefs of Mr. Foil.
Another example can be seen from the emotions of Donna Jensen, who is calm during the negotiations process. This makes it possible for her and Erin to go through the issues and come to a satisfactory conclusion for both parties. Other sets of emotions critical in the video are those showcased by Erin. Erin is sad after learning about the illnesses affecting the residents of Hinkley, California. Her sadness affects the conclusion of the negotiation as she did everything in her power to get the correct information required to help reach a perfect conclusion.
Question 7: Analyze (in general) the communication styles adopted by each party. Why they are approaching it
Both the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and Donna Jensen adopted the use of verbal communication during the negotiation process. Verbal communication was critical in the negotiation process as it guarantees to understand between the two negotiating parties. The two parties chose the verbal communication style in negotiating their differences as verbal communication leaves no room for confusion. It makes understanding easy and ensures all parties make decisions based on facts and not assumptions that may arise as a result of inadequate understanding during communication.
Question 8: When the video ends, at what stage do you believe the negotiation is? Drawing on your understanding of the negotiation process, what would you recommend happen next, and why?
When the video ends, I believe the negotiations ended when Embry handed over the documents from research done regarding the negotiations to Erin. The documents handed over entailed a 1966 memo that offered insight regarding the contamination of water by hexavalent chromium. In the memo jotted in 1966, the corporate headquarters knew the conditions of the contamination of the water by hexavalent chromium coming from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) but did nothing regarding the situation. They advised the Hinkley operation to keep information regarding the contamination of the water from the residents. This act forced the judge to order Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to pay a settlement fee of three hundred and thirty-three million dollars, which was to be equally distributed among the complainants. Five million dollars of the total amount was to be given to the Jensen’s.
Based on my understanding of the negotiation process, I would recommend the closure of the negotiation process once the solution has been reached. After the judge ordered Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to pay a settlement fee of three hundred and thirty-three million dollars, which was to be equally distributed among the complainants, the next step would be the closure of the negotiating process. Closure of the negotiating process begins with setting benchmarks and deadlines regarding the timeline the organization will have to settle the Hinkley residents. Once the deadlines and benchmarks have been set, the negotiating process is shut down, allowing the two parties to take a break from the negotiating table. Lastly, a contingent contract must be drafted to help ensure that the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) delivers on the verdict and that the residents of Hinkley are compensated as agreed upon by the court of law.
References
Anon, (2011). Erin Brockovich (4/10) Movie CLIP – I Thought We Were Negotiating Here? (2000) HD. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Jdk3riKKwo&feature=youtu.be [Accessed 24 Feb. 2020].
Kolb, D., and Williams, J. (2014). The shadow negotiation. New York: Simon & Schuster, pp.401-404.