Hello here are three articles need three responses
1-In this case, I was the seller (Audio) and Jay was the buyer (Magnetics). This negotiation was controlled by both of us at certain times. In my case, I was not too stressed about not reaching a deal. Worst case scenario, I was in charge of the internal sales and I had a good estimation of profits. In the case of the buyer, they were facing the possibility of not making any profit from this component, and also let higher management know about their lack of interest in the product at first. The main factors of these negotiation were both the transfer price and any protection we could get to sell our final products with this new technology having a competitive advantage over our competitors. The difference this time was that we were not only negotiating price, so there were many ways in which both parties could walk out with a good deal. In this exercise, Jay and I didn’t reach any deal. On my part, I should have be more firm on an specific offer. I was just trying to make my point on protection, and I left the transfer price to a side for part of the negotiation. I also learned, that people had to enter a negotiation willing to give some room for the other party. Jay’s price was too low, and he never agreed on going higher, which made it very difficult for me to walk out with a fair deal, so I decided to leave with no deal at all. In the future, I will equally negotiate all parts of the terms.
2-Representing Audio Department
I think in these negotiations none of the parties was controlling the negotiations. Negotiations took place between two companies departments. Both departments were interesting in making a deal, because it would enhance the benefits of both parties. The main point that was discussed during the negotiations was the transfer price between of the technology from one department to another and the during how much time the Magnetic department will be not able to sell it to competitors. I think that these negotiations were very different from Coffee contract and BioPharm-Seltek plant negotiations, because this time negotiation were within the company, while before the negotiated deal was between two companies and f the deal will not be completed the companies can look for some other options on the market. In El-Tek negotiation the department had the possibility not to cooperate, however it would be more beneficial to cooperate for both departments as well as the company as the whole. In addition to that, these negotiations were different from the previous one because the bottom line, which was the minimum transfer was not specified. The final profit would be calculated by the net profit from the del minus the transfer price. I think my mistake during these negotiations was reveling more detail from my final that I supposed to reveal. However, even after that, I thought that the Magnetic Department should earn more that my department because they were the developers of the product and deserve the higher final profit margin that my department. From these negotiations I have learned that I need to pay more attention on creating extra value of my services/product and be able to show some strength and advantages of my positions. For the next negotiations I will try to focus more on the strength of my position and show better the offered value
3- During the El-Tek negotiation both Audio (Sinead) and Magnetics (myself) had control at different points of the negotiation process. We both listened to each other while discussing our interests and positions for our department and the company at large. We went back and forth in discussing various options to come to an agreement that would benefit the company and our individual departments. The critical factors in the negotiation were transfer price, restrictions on Z-25 and length of time placed on restrictions of Z-25. The negotiation was concluded with an agreement for option 3 which met both our interest and was beneficial to the company. The included the Audio department receiving protection against direct competitors, the product to be sold externally for commercial opportunities and transfer price. The context of this negotiation was different as we both represented the same company and wanted to do what was in the company’s best interest and both departments so collaboration was necessary as we discussed our interests we shared in common.
From this experience I learned that allowing the context of the situation to guide my approach and the way I plan for the negotiation is helpful during the negotiation process and coming to an agreement. I learned that the behavior of others can be influenced by their goal and the context of the situation as well. From this situation I learned that bargaining can be based on creating value during the negotiation and creating mutual solutions helps resolve conflict. We identified issues and created solutions to problems that had benefit for both Audio and Magnetics departments. In the future I would like to plan and approach the negotiation based on the context as well as be creative with different scenarios or solutions in reaching an agreement.