International Negotiation PDF

Final negotiation activity
The East Africa Tender

Background
You and your team are currently on your way to the Tanzanian city of Arusha to take part in negotiations
concerning the development of a multimillion-dollar subsea cable system (your trainer will tell you which
organisation you are representing). On the flight over you are interested to see the following article in today’s
issue of the Pan-African Business Bulletin. Read it and discuss any implications it may have with your team.
The LasT ConTinenT

PLugging afriCa inTo The gLobaL neTwork
The proposed construction of an undersea
cable network to finally connect East Africa
with business centres throughout the rest of the
world enters the final round of negotiations in
Arusha this morning.
The project was put out to tender three months
ago by the inter-governmental East Africa
Community (EAC) consisting of the Republics of
Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi,
with its headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania.
Apart from Antarctica, Africa remains the last
continent to enjoy full high-capacity connectivity
with the World Wide Web. A spokesperson for
the EAC said: ‘Current satellite networks are
Photo credit: © Shutterstock/Gwoeli
uneconomical and impede the development of
telecoms businesses in the region. This landmark The project is not without its challenges.
development will open up new opportunities for Undersea cables are vulnerable to damage due
such enterprises and give the whole economy to adverse weather conditions. One recent
of East Africa a considerable and much-needed disruption to transmission left tens of millions
boost.’ of internet users in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and
For years Africa has lagged behind in the digital Pakistan without connections for days before
race with a less than 6% share of global internet traffic could be rerouted. And continuing
use. In some parts of Central and West Africa, piracy off the coast of Kenya’s northern
fewer than 2% of the population have internet neighbour Somalia remains a constant threat to
access. But demand for greater bandwidth has shipping in the area and could seriously delay
long outstripped supply, with the number of construction of the proposed network.
users increasing by over 1,000% in the last ten Seven cable-laying companies are known
years. In fact, according to recent projections, to have been involved in the first round of
the Middle East and Africa are now by far the negotiations with the EAC. Just two remain
fastest-growing regions. for the final round: MarCom and Subsea
In response to this, the EAC has been accepting Cable Dynamics. Sources suggest that the
tenders for the laying of 17,000km of fibre-optic overall budget and technical specifications
cable along the east coast of Africa. The plan have already been agreed. So the key deciding
is then to link this via Egypt to a landing point factors are likely to be performance guarantees,
in the French seaport of Marseille, thereby the shareholding split and, crucially, the
connecting East Africa with European and amount of inward investment the bidders are
Asian networks. Completion of the project is prepared to make in local cable manufacturing
expected to take three years and will be broken plants, together with any required transfer of
into three separate phases, each costing in the technology. The successful tender is expected to
region of 200 million US dollars. be announced later this month.
From International Negotiations by Mark Powell © Cambridge University Press 2012 PHOTOCOPIABLE
1
© Ernst Klett Verlag GmbH, Stuttgart 2012 | www.klett.de | Alle Rechte vorbehalten International Negotiations, Final negotiation activity:
Von dieser Druckvorlage ist die Vervielfältigung für den eigenen The East Africa Tender
Unterrichtsgebrauch gestattet. Die Kopiergebühren sind abgegolten. A08021-53518003
The The East Africa Tender
Team 1: Subsea Cable Dynamics
Photo credit: © John Fraser Hunt/Alamy
In the upcoming negotiation, you and your team represent the interests of Subsea Cable Dynamics (SCD), one of
the two remaining bidders for the East Africa cable network contract. SCD is a privately funded company with 15
years of accumulated expertise in submarine fibre-optic cable installation.
Here’s a summary of the terms and specifications which have so far been agreed with the EAC:
1 17,000km of subsea fibre-optic cable (capacity 1.28 terabytes/sec) to be installed over the three phases of the
project at a cost of USD190m per phase (you understand this is within an acceptable 10% of the estimate the
EAC obtained from an independent consultancy prior to negotiations).
2 This initial contract to cover just the first phase of the project. Phases 2 and 3 to be open to competitive
tender on the understanding that, upon successful completion of Phase 1, the contractor will have ‘preferred
bidder status’ for the remaining two phases.
3 The cable to be manufactured and materials sourced locally at fully-equipped plants in the EAC member
countries; the cost of plant conversion and/or construction, staff training and retooling to be shared by SCD
and the EAC (precise share of costs to be discussed).
2
And here are the points you need to negotiate in your meeting in Arusha:
1 Term of the contract

Knowing that the EAC is keen to promote foreign direct investment (FDI) in the region, you agreed to set
up new cable plants and/or upgrade existing plants and manufacture locally using a combination of local
labour and support staff and, initially, expatriate managers. You estimate, however, that this will incur costs
of at least USD75m and you could not hope to recoup your share of this investment from the revenue for just
Phase 1 of the project. You would, therefore, appreciate a more formal commitment in writing from the EAC
that your contract will be extended into Phases 2 and 3. In addition, if you lost out to another bidder at the
end of Phase 1 and were forced to sell your interests in the manufacturing plants on to them, you would not
be in a very strong position to get a good price for them. So, simply having ‘preferred bidder status’ on Phases
2 and 3 is not sufficient. Ideally, you’d like the contract to be extended to at least Phase 2, if not all three
phases. This is a top priority for you, but exercise caution, as the EAC are under the impression that the term
of the contract has already been agreed.
2 funding of the manufacturing facility
You would expect the EAC to contribute at least a third of the funding for plant conversion (or construction)
and staff training (approx. USD25m). The less they are prepared to finance this, the more vulnerable you are
to heavy financial losses if you lose the contract after Phase 1. Of course, if the contract was longer and your
revenue stream more assured, you might be prepared to cover more of the manufacturing costs.
3 ownership of the manufacturing plants and intellectual property rights (iPrs)
You would, of course, share ownership of the manufacturing plants with the EAC. But whatever your
financial stake in their development, you would insist on a majority share in the ownership. Manufacturing
and sourcing locally inevitably involve some transfer of technology on your part to your African business
partners. But, in the event that you were not contracted for Phases 2 and 3, you could not let your patented
technologies and procedures fall into the hands of your competitors. So you must retain control here.
4 insurance costs
Normally, you would insure yourself against production and installation hold-ups, but the risks with
this contract are substantially higher because of the ever-present threat of piracy in the region. Similar
projects have suffered months of delay when cable-laying vessels were hijacked and ransoms demanded.
It’s a delicate issue, but you would require the EAC to agree to cover the extra cost of insuring against such
disasters (subject to approving the quote for this).
5 warranty period
The lifespan of a cable network is around 20 to 30 years. Capital outlay can normally be recovered in four to
six years. So this represents a very good return on investment (ROI) for the EAC. You are prepared to offer
an industry-standard warranty of two years. But you would like to exclude from the warranty any break in
transmission due to environmental causes, faulty work by sub-contractors or power supply failures which
are outside your control. You have an excellent reliability record (30% better than MarCom’s) and are, in
fact, the patent-holders of PlowSafe™, a new cable-laying technology which has been found to be 60% more
effective in cable protection. The PlowSafe™ system, however, was not part of your original bid to the EAC as
it would have increased the overall cost by 10% (USD57m).
Procedure
1 Allocate roles amongst your negotiating team, e.g. chief negotiator, facilitator, decision-maker, number-
cruncher, ideas-generator, observer. How can you maximise your strengths?
2 From the information you have, prioritise your objectives. Draw up a H.I.T. list, if you like, of your ‘have to
gets’, ‘intend to gets’ and ‘tradeables’. And try to predict what the other team’s priorities might be.
3 Once you’ve established your target points for each of the main variables, agree on what your opening and
reservation points are.
4 When you’re ready, join the other team. Your negotiation should follow the following stages:
build rapport (remember you have met the other team once before)
establish a procedure (who will speak first, what’s on the agenda?)
set out your proposals and listen carefully to those of the other team
probe with questions, clarify any misunderstandings and explore underlying interests
bargain and exchange trade-offs on the main issues
handle any breakdowns (you can each call a time-out if you need to rethink your strategy)
close the deal, writing down any terms agreed or points to discuss in further meetings.
3
Team 2: The East Africa Community Delegation
Photo credit: © Anton Vengo / Superstock
In the upcoming negotiation, you and your team represent the interests of the East Africa Community
delegation. You are currently deciding between two tenders for the cable network construction contract: one
from MarCom and one from Subsea Cable Dynamics (SCD). You have already held a second meeting with the
MarCom team and are now about to meet again with SCD.
The independent consultancy you hired prior to these negotiations estimated the cost of the project to be
USD550m. MarCom’s quote was USD556 and SCD’s USD570. Both quotes fall well within an acceptable 10%
margin of your original estimate, but clearly there is a small but significant price differential. On balance, you
prefer SDC’s initial proposal, mostly because they are prepared to invest in manufacturing and materials sourcing
locally, whereas MarCom are only prepared to assemble imported components locally. You were also a little
more impressed with SCD’s technical presentation and feel you can learn a lot from them when it comes to
technology transfer. However, there are other factors to consider and at the end of your meeting with SCD, you
will have to decide whether to (a) offer SCD the contract, (b) offer MarCom the contract, (c) schedule another
meeting with one or both of your two bidders or (d) put the contract out to further tender.
Here’s a summary of the terms and specifications which were agreed with SCD during the first round of
negotiations:
1 17,000km of subsea fibre-optic cable (capacity 1.28 terabytes/sec) to be installed over the three phases of the
project at a cost of USD190m per phase (USD570 in total).
2 This initial contract to cover just the first phase of the project. Phases 2 and 3 to be open to competitive
tender on the understanding that, upon successful completion of Phase 1, the contractor will have ‘preferred
bidder status’ for the remaining two phases. In practice, the preferred bidder almost always wins subsequent
phases of the contract, but the uncertainty keeps them focused!
3 The cable to be manufactured and materials sourced locally at fully-equipped plants in the EAC member
countries; the cost of plant conversion and/or construction, staff training and retooling to be shared by SCD
and the EAC (precise share of costs to be discussed).
4
And here are the points you need to negotiate in your meeting in Arusha:
1 funding of the manufacturing facility

You would expect SCD to contribute 90% of the funding for plant conversion (or construction) and staff
training. In normal circumstances they would cover all the costs here, but as a token of your appreciation of
their agreeing to manufacture and source locally, you are prepared to make a small contribution to plant costs
(10%). Of course, as an inter-governmental organisation, you might be able to reduce the time taken to get
the necessary permits and planning permission and to keep costs as low as possible by, for example, allocating
state-owned land. You should also make SCD aware that investing locally is one of the main factors in their
favour as a bidder. Foreign direct investment (FDI) in sub-Saharan Africa has historically been rather scarce
and you are under pressure to create jobs both during and on completion of this project.
2 ownership of the manufacturing plants
Even though you expect SCD to fund most of the plant construction and/or conversion, as a government
body, you are required to be a majority shareholder in any joint ventures with foreign enterprises. So the
minimum share split of the manufacturing venture would have to be 51:49 in your favour. Ideally, you’d like
a 70:30 split, but realise this might alarm SCD, who will be investing a lot of capital (including intellectual
capital) in this part of the project. MarCom, although only agreeing to have local assembly plants, did accept
a 60:40 split.
3 warranty period
You are very concerned about the reliability of the network. Any prolonged breaks in transmissions would
be acutely embarrassing for the governments of your member states and could seriously harm international
trade and commerce. The lifespan of a cable network is around 20 to 30 years. Capital outlay can normally
be recovered in four to six years. So this represents a pretty good return on investment (ROI) for you. But the
industry-standard warranty is just two years, which leaves a two-year period of vulnerability. So you want to
push for a four-year warranty with SCD if you can. After applying considerable pressure to MarCom, whose
reliability record is not as good as SCD’s, you got them to agree to a three-year warranty. Having a secure
and reliable system is a top priority for you. With weather conditions becoming more extreme and increased
shipping traffic, you need to protect your investment.
Procedure
1 Allocate roles amongst your negotiating team, e.g. chief negotiator, facilitator, decision-maker, number-
cruncher, ideas-generator, observer. How can you maximise your strengths?
2 From the information you have, prioritise your objectives. Draw up a H.I.T. list, if you like, of your ‘have to
gets’, ‘intend to gets’ and ‘tradeables’. And try to predict what the other team’s priorities might be.
3 Once you’ve established your target points for each of the main variables, agree on what your opening and
reservation points are.
4 When you’re ready, join the other team. Your negotiation should follow the following stages:
build rapport (remember you have met the other team once before)
establish a procedure (who will speak first, what’s on the agenda?)
set out your proposals and listen carefully to those of the other team
probe with questions, clarify any misunderstandings and explore underlying interests
bargain and exchange trade-offs on the main issues
handle any breakdowns (you can each call a time-out if you need to rethink your strategy)
close the deal, writing down any terms agreed or points to discuss in further meetings.
5
Professional English
International
Negotiations
Trainer’s Notes
This case study has been designed to bring together all the skills and techniques practised and
developed in the International Negotiations course.
The lesson can be divided into four stages:
• Stage 1: Background reading
• Stage 2: Preparing to negotiate – discussions within teams
• Stage 3: Negotiation with the other team
• Stage 4: Feedback and analysis
Each of these stages could be quite quick (around 20–25 minutes each, adding up to a single
90-minute lesson), but will be more effective if you allow more time (30–45 minutes each,
adding up to two 60- or 90-minute lessons). If you are short of time, you could set some or all
of the reading as homework, but make sure you also provide opportunities in class for trainees
to discuss the texts with each other and with you.
However you plan this lesson, make sure you allow enough time for all four stages.
Background note
• The negotiation in the case study is fictional, but based very closely on a series of
negotiations that actually took place in 2005. The companies named in the case study
are fictional, but the East Africa Community (EAC) is a real organisation (see http://
www.eac.int/). The details of the negotiation (e.g. costs, negotiation points) have been
carefully researched to make them as authentic as possible.
• See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEACOM_(African_cable_system) for some background
to the real negotiation and project. Trainees may also be interested to read this article
after the negotiation.
Stage 1: Background reading

1 Distribute the first page of the case study. Draw attention to the title of the activity (The East
Africa Tender) and the article’s headline (The Last Continent – Plugging Africa into the Global
Network) and accompanying photo, to elicit what they can guess about the negotiation
without reading the article.
Language note
• A tender is an offer to do a job or supply goods for a specified price. Governments
(and other large organisations) often invite bidders (= a range of companies) to submit
tenders for a particular job (e.g. to build a new road), and then choose the best offer,
based on price and other conditions. This process can be called a Call for Tender, a Call
for Bids or a Request for Tender (RFT).
1 International Negotiations Trainer’s Notes © Cambridge University Press 2012 PhotocoPiable

www.cambridge.org/elt/internationalnegotiations
6
Final negotiation activity: The East Africa Tender
2 Divide the class into two teams. If you have a large class (i.e. more than around 12 trainees),
you may want to divide the class into four teams. However, this will make the lesson more
difficult to manage, as you will have two separate negotiations to organise. Tell the teams
which side of the negotiation they are representing: either the East African Community
(EAC), an inter-governmental organisation, or Subsea Cable Dynamics (SCD), a company
which specialises in underwater fibre-optic cables. You could elicit from the class what
else they can guess about the negotiation based on this information (e.g. Which countries
might be members of the EAC? Why might the EAC be in negotiations with a fibre-optic
cable company?).
3 Tell trainees to read the short background paragraph to identify key information about the
negotiation (i.e. that the negotiation is taking place in Arusha, Tanzania, and that it concerns
the development of an undersea cable system).
4 Trainees read the article carefully to identify the key facts, and then spend a few minutes
discussing the implications of those facts with their teams. When you discuss the key facts
with the class, make sure everyone understands all the main implications, especially the
challenges from paragraph 5 and the points that have already been agreed and the key
deciding factors from paragraph 6, as this will be essential for the success of the negotiations.
Suggested answers (important facts and implications for both teams)

• It’s the final round of negotiations. Possible implication: Both sides have invested a lot
of time and effort into these negotiations, so they want to make them work; they are
close to a solution; they probably already have a business relationship, built up over
previous rounds.
• The subsea fibre-optic cables are very important for East Africa’s economic
development: current satellite networks cannot supply the increasing demand for
internet access. Possible implication: This is a vital project for the EAC – they want to
build the network urgently but properly.
• Africa is an important region for internet companies, because it is expected to grow
faster than other parts of the world. Possible implication: This is an important project
for SCD, in terms of its long-term strategy and involvement in future big investment
projects in Africa. It is good to build strong relationships and a reputation in this part of
the world.
• The cables will be 17,000km long, and will take three years to complete. Possible
implication: This is a huge project, and potentially quite complicated.
• The project will be divided into three phases, each costing around $200 million.
Possible implication: The contract for each phase may need to be renegotiated
separately.
• Challenges to the project include severe weather and piracy. Possible implication: There
could be large unexpected costs and delays. Even if nothing goes wrong, there will be
high insurance premiums to pay.
• Only two of the original seven companies remain in the negotiations. Possible
implication: SCD has done well so far, but could still lose out to MarCom. The EAC has a
very clear BATNA in its negotiation with SCD (i.e. it can accept MarCom’s offer).
• Some aspects (budget and technical specifications) have already been agreed. Possible
implication: there is no need to worry about these in the final round of the negotiation,
although it may be possible/necessary to bring them back into the discussion to break
a deadlock.
• The key deciding factors are likely to be performance guarantees, the shareholding split
and inward investment. Possible implication: the negotiation should focus on these.
• The result will be announced soon. Possible implication: The EAC are keen to reach a
deal with one of the two remaining companies. They do not want to have to go back to
the beginning of the process again.

7
You could check everyone understands the meanings of the following words and phrases from
the article: to put sth out to tender, to impede sth, a boost, to lag behind sb, bandwidth, to
outstrip sth, a phase, vulnerable, adverse, a disruption, piracy.
Language notes
• A guarantee is a promise to fix a future problem with a product or service (e.g. by
repairing or replacing it). It is very similar to a warranty, which is a legal promise about
the present quality of a product or service, but which does not specify how problems
will be remedied. A guarantee is often free, while a warranty can be bought for an
additional fee. Very often the terms are used interchangeably (as they are in this
case study).
• The shareholding split describes the division of ownership rights between two or more
owners of a business. For example, there may be a 51:49 split, where one party has a
slight majority of shares, and therefore more control over the business.
• Inward investment means investment into a country by foreign-owned businesses.
Governments are often keen to encourage inward investment, as it creates jobs for local
people. It is also called FDI (Foreign Direct Investment).
• Transfer of technology involves sharing your technological expertise with other
organisations. Sometimes this is unavoidable (e.g. in jointly-owned factories), but
companies often try to keep it to a minimum.
Stage 2: Preparing to negotiate

1 Hand out copies of the team briefings. Trainees work in their two teams to read the
information and work through the list of steps in the procedure (1–3). Monitor carefully to
make sure they have fully understood all the information for their team. You can also refer
trainees to the relevant units in International Negotiations (e.g. Unit 1 for allocating roles).
2 Make sure they spend plenty of time (i.e. at least five minutes) on each of the three steps, and
check their progress carefully. You can use the Stage 2: checklist (see p5 below) to make sure
they fully understand all the relevant information. With weaker classes, you could photocopy
the questions, which serve as a comprehension check. With stronger classes, you could ask
the questions informally as a checklist.
Stage 3: Negotiation
1 Make sure both teams have worked through stages 1–3 of their procedures. Then distribute
copies of the feedback forms. Go through them carefully with the class to make sure everyone
knows what they will need to focus on during the negotiation.
2 Elicit from the class which team will lead the negotiations (probably the EAC, as they are the
hosts). Go through point 4 of the procedure, the list of seven stages (which are the same
for both teams), to make sure everyone knows how the negotiation will work. You may also
decide to set a time limit, especially if this is something beyond your control (e.g. because the
lesson needs to finish), but make sure you allow plenty of time for both the full negotiation
and thorough feedback (in the next lesson if necessary). Make sure trainees also know that
the aim for both sides is to reach the point where a decision can be made quickly, rather than
leave problems to be resolved later.
3 Start the negotiation and monitor carefully. Ideally, you would also record the negotiation on
video, for later analysis. Focus on the effective use of the techniques from the course, rather
than language mistakes. Try not to get involved, although it may be necessary to move the
negotiation forward if you are running out of time.

8
Stage 4: Feedback and analysis

Ask trainees to work alone to complete the feedback form. They then discuss their ideas in
pairs. After a few minutes, open up the discussion to include the whole class. Go through the
form question-by-question to elicit and give feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of
the negotiation.
Follow-up ideas
1 Members of one team try to work out which roles (e.g. facilitator, number-cruncher)
the people in the other team were playing. This could generate some surprises.
2 They could also try to guess what the other team’s H.I.T. list was, what their BATNA
was, and what the target point, opening point and reservation points for each of
their variables were. Again, when they discuss these with the other team, there could
be some surprises. They could also read the other team’s briefing to check how well
they did.
3 You could ask trainees to write a short report of their negotiation, or simply to read
the background to the real negotiation (see the Background note on p1).

9
Stage 2: checklist for Team 1 (SCD) Stage 2 checklist: Team 1 answers

1 What are your strengths as a company? 1 15 years of expertise; an excellent reliability record
2 How realistic was your cost estimation? 2 It was realistic – within the 10% margin.
3 What has been agreed about the three phases? 3 Only phase 1 is covered under this contract; phases 2 and 3 will
need to be renegotiated, with other contractors also making offers.
4 Will the local plants (factories) be brand new 4 This hasn’t been decided yet.
or simply converted old ones?
5 Why are you worried about the term of the 5 Because you wouldn’t be able to recoup (= recover) your costs.
contract?
6 Why do you need to exercise caution when 6 Because the EAC believe the term has already been agreed.
discussing the term of the contract?
7 What does the figure of $25 million 7 It is one third of the cost of setting up the cable plants – the
represent? $75 million mentioned in point 1.
8 Why are you worried about your intellectual 8 Because you don’t want your patented technologies to fall into the
property rights? hands of your competitors.
9 Why might your insurance costs be higher? 9 Because of the higher risks from piracy.
10
What does ‘subject to approving the quote’ 10
The EAC would be able to check that the quote from the insurers
mean? is genuine, and not just a figure invented by SCD.
11
Why is this such a good ROI for the EAC? 11
Because they can recover their costs quite quickly, and then
effectively have the cable network for free for the rest of its
long life.
12
Why are you worried about the 12
Because there are many factors which are outside your control.
warranty period?
13
Why didn’t you include PlowSafe in your bid? 13
Because it’s more expensive.
✁
Stage 2: checklist for Team 2 (EAC) Stage 2 checklist: Team 2 answers
1 How many meetings have you had with the 1 Two with MarCom, one with SCD
two companies?
2 What was the maximum cost quote you were 2 $550m + 10% = $605m
prepared to accept?
3 In what way was MarCom’s bid better? 3 The cost was lower.
4 In what ways was SCD’s bid better? 4 They were prepared to invest in sourcing and manufacturing
locally; they gave a more impressive technological presentation.
5 What has been agreed about the three phases? 5 Only phase 1 is covered under this contract; phases 2 and 3 will
need to be renegotiated, with other contractors also making offers.
6 What is the advantage of dividing the 6 It keeps the successful bidder focused.
contract into three phases?
✁
7 Will the local plants (factories) be brand new 7 This hasn’t been decided yet.
or simply converted old ones?
8 In what three ways can the EAC support the 8 By contributing 10% to the costs; by minimising administrative
manufacturing facility? time and costs; by allocating state-owned land.
9 Why is inward investment such an important 9 Because MarCom is offering only to assemble imported
factor in favour of SCD? components locally, not manufacture them.
10
What do the three ownership splits represent: 10
51:49 is the minimum in any joint venture; 70:30 is the ideal split;
51:49, 70:30 and 60:40? 60:40 is what MarCom accepted.
11
Why is reliability so important to you? 11
Breaks in transmission would be embarrassing, and would be bad
✁
for trade and commerce.

12
Why is this such a good ROI for you? 12
Because you can recover your costs quite quickly and then
effectively have the cable network for free for the rest of its
long life.
13
What does the ‘two-year period of 13
The period between the end of the standard two-year warranty and
vulnerability’ refer to? the earliest time you will recover your capital outlay (4 years).

10
Feedback form
Evaluate your own and others’ negotiation skills, using the feedback form below.
Final feedback: Negotiation skills

NEGOTIATORS:
OUTCOME OF THE NEGOTIATION
Did you reach an agreement? Yes / Almost / No
If so, how happy are you with what was agreed? Extremely / Very / Fairly / Not very
If not, what were the main obstacles to agreement?
What was your role in the negotiation (e.g. decision-maker, technical expert)?
How well did you play it? Well, I think / Pretty well /
Not too badly / I could have done better
If you could negotiate again, what (if anything) would you do differently?
Make notes on what was discussed during the negotiation under the following headings:
Agreed To be finalised
1 Term of contract
2 Plant funding
3 Plant ownership
(inc. IPRs)
4 Warranty
5 Insurance
6 Options
(e.g. PlowSafe™)
11
Feedback form
SKILLS ASSESSMENT
1 How would you describe the relationship-building phase of the negotiation
(e.g. over-familiar, warm, positive, polite, over-formal, cool, suspicious, hostile)?
Give a few examples.
2 Did you have any problems establishing the procedure and agreeing the agenda?
Yes / No
If so, what? How did you deal with new items being added to the agenda?
3 How clear were your proposals, summaries, confirmations/corrections and
counter-proposals?
Clear and concise / Pretty clear for the most part / It got a bit confusing at times
4 Did you listen carefully and allow the other team to speak before interrupting?
Yes / Mostly / Probably not enough
5 On reflection, do you think you asked enough questions during the negotiation?
Yes / We probably should have asked more / Unfortunately not
6 On balance, did you tend to take up fixed positions or did you mostly try to
uncover interests?
POSITIONS INTERESTS
Give some examples of important interests you uncovered. How did these help you?
7 Did you do enough to generate further options?
Yes, we created value / Not really
8 Did you remember to attach conditions to your offers and concessions?
Yes / Not always / No
9 Did you find any persuasion techniques particularly effective?
Yes / Not really
If so, which ones?
10
Did you have to deal with any ‘dirty tricks’?
Yes / No
If so, what? How did you deal with them?
11
How did you deal with any deadlocks or breakdowns in communication?
12
Regardless of the result, how positively did the negotiation end?
Very / Fairly / Not very
12

International Negotiation PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

International Negotiation PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Final negotiation activity

The East Africa Tender

The LasT ConTinenT

Photo credit: © John Fraser Hunt/Alamy

1 Term of the contract

Photo credit: © Anton Vengo / Superstock

1 funding of the manufacturing facility

Stage 1: Background reading

1 International Negotiations Trainer’s Notes © Cambridge University Press 2012 PhotocoPiable

Suggested answers (important facts and implications for both teams)

2 International Negotiations Trainer’s Notes © Cambridge University Press 2012 PhotocoPiable

Stage 2: Preparing to negotiate

3 International Negotiations Trainer’s Notes © Cambridge University Press 2012 PhotocoPiable

Stage 4: Feedback and analysis

4 International Negotiations Trainer’s Notes © Cambridge University Press 2012 PhotocoPiable

Stage 2: checklist for Team 1 (SCD) Stage 2 checklist: Team 1 answers

for trade and commerce.

5 International Negotiations Trainer’s Notes © Cambridge University Press 2012 PhotocoPiable

Final feedback: Negotiation skills

OUTCOME OF THE NEGOTIATION

S-ar putea să vă placă și