Search results

A small start-up company must make additional investments to maximize its firm value. But the company owner will not make this investment unless she can renegotiate outstanding debt claims. Solving this “debt overhang” problem through negotiation is the focus of the case. In this context, students are exposed to a variety of issues: the nature of financial claims, bargaining and negotiation fundamentals, and agency costs of debt.

Negotiation, Human Resource Management.

Graduate and post graduate level course in Human Resource Management, Industrial Relations, and Negotiation.

The present case unfolds sequence of events in the wake of collective bargaining between the union and the management of Bajaj Auto for settling the issue of wage revision. Since no agreement could be reached between both the parties, the workers' union called for a strike. This was the first case of strike in the plant in its 16 years of existence. Bajaj Auto is India's second-largest motorcycle manufacturer in the country, having its manufacturing plants at Chakan (Pune, Maharashtra), Pantnagar (Uttrakhand), Waluj in Aurangabad, Maharashtra. The Chakan plant, set up in 1999, has an installed capacity of over 3,000 units a day. The present case relates to workers' strike at its Chakan Plant which lasted for more than 50 days. The case is analysed from the negotiation point of view.

To understand basic principles/rules of negotiation; to explain the framework that can be used to assess the relative strength of power of the parties involved in negotiation; and to understand various power moves used by parties involved in negotiation.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

The case deals with comparison of two events namely Bhopal Gas Tragedy and BP Oil Spill Tragedy. Specifically, the case compares the negotiation process and its outcome. In other words, the case compares how negotiation was carried out on behalf of victims of these tragedies and resulted in optimal outcomes in one situation and sub-optimal outcomes in another situation. It case also provides insights into cross-cultural issues in negotiation process as one of the events took place in emerging economy (India) and other one in a developed economy (USA). The case gives insight for individuals on how handle communication process during the course of negotiation.

Strategy.

The case study is intended for organization theory and strategic management courses at the undergraduate and postgraduate (MBA) levels.

The case describes a company located in a fictitious developing country. The main activity of the company is the exploitation and production of tin, which it has developed over its 40-year history (1971-2011). During the first 33 years, it developed three capabilities: namely, technical, productive and the generation of trust among employees. The case illustrates three characteristics of capabilities: problem solving and complexity, practicing and succeeding, and reliability over time. The case also illustrates a paradox related to capabilities and shows three of its causes: path dependency and lock-in to a given course of action, structural inertia, and the absence of a capability dynamization function. In 2009, the company was faced with the need to reshape its capabilities and the arrival of a new President to the company provided the appropriate occasion to analyse this option.

These include: understanding what an organizational capability is and what its main characteristics are; understanding the process by which an organizational capability emerges and develops, and how it may be eroded in a given scenario; understanding a paradox an organization faces when capabilities are developed; and understanding why the concept of dynamic capabilities does not add power to the concept of capabilities.

Teaching notes are available, please consult your librarian for access. Videos with interviews of employees of the case company are also available.

One Acre Fund (OAF) was founded by Andrew Youn in 2005 for the purpose of helping to solve the chronic hunger problem in Africa. The idea is to provide the resources (seed, fertilizer, and education) necessary for African farm families to feed themselves when their land holdings are one acre or less. The business model of OAF is that of a cooperative: OAF buys resources like seeds and fertilizer in bulk at reduced prices and distributes them to small farmers who otherwise could not afford them. This case concerns the negotiation that OAF's manager of external relations and research, Moises Postigo, conducted to buy fertilizer in the last quarter of 2007. The case provides an opportunity for students to analyze a real-world deal-making negotiation in a developing economy. A number of aspects of the context of the negotiation and the negotiation process itself make for good class discussion. Postigo did a good job preparing for the negotiation, making the case one that emphasizes proper use of negotiation planning and sensitive understanding of the negotiation environment. Some of the elements that make for good discussion include the following: OAF was a new organization, unknown to the five major providers of fertilizer in Kenya. The negotiations were entirely conducted by cell phone. Negotiations went through stages of request for a bid, discussion with multiple bidders, selection of a provider, and negotiation. There were multiple issues, including price delivery and form of payment. Postigo was negotiating in the shadow of the possibility that the Kenyan government would start selling subsidized fertilizer to small farmers.

Analyze the fundamentals of a real-world negotiation; Consider cultural implications for negotiation strategy; Consider negotiation strategy decisions particular to the context: commodity purchase, developing country, etc. Understand how the economic and political context affects negotiations; Understand the importance of relationships in negotiations.

This case is one of a pair of cases used in a merger negotiation. It is designed to be used with “British Petroleum, Ltd.” (UVA-F-1263). One-half of the class prepares only the British Petroleum (BP) case, and one-half uses this case. BP and Amoco are considering a merger, and are in the process of negotiating a merger agreement. Macroeconomic assumptions, particularly forecasting future oil prices in an uncertain environment, and assumptions about Amoco's ability to reduce exploration and production costs make Amoco's future cash flows difficult to predict.

The first across-the-table negotiation between Google and China concluded successfully in 2006, when Google received a license to establish a local domain (google.cn) targeted at Chinese Internet users and not subject to the “Great Firewall.” During these negotiations both Google and the Chinese government struggled to reach an outcome that would be acceptable to their constituents. Google was caught between pleasing its shareholders and preserving its reputation for free access to information, while China was balancing the desire for cutting-edge search technology and the concern that liberal access to information would undermine its political-economic model. In the end, the negotiation resulted in Google operating two domains in China: Google.com and Google.cn. In early 2010, Google announced that its corporate infrastructure had been the target of a series of China-based cyber attacks and accused the Chinese government of attempting to further limit free speech on the web. These incidents led to a public conflict and private negotiations between Google and the Chinese government, which culminated in July 2010 when the Chinese government renewed the google.cn license knowing that Google was redirecting all Chinese customers search to its google.hk.com site This case concerns the changes in Google and the Chinese government's environment that led to Google withdrawing services from google.cn and the Chinese government saving face by renewing the google.cn license. The case is based on the publicly reported events surrounding two series of negotiations between the U.S. technology giant Google and the Chinese Government regarding Google's license in China.

This case is one of a pair of cases used in a merger negotiation. It is designed to be used with “Amoco Corporation” (UVA-F-1262). One-half of the class prepares only the Amoco case, and one-half uses this case. BP and Amoco are considering a merger, and are in the process of negotiating a merger agreement. Macroeconomic assumptions, particularly forecasting future oil prices in an uncertain environment, and assumptions about Amoco's ability to reduce exploration and production costs make Amoco's future cash flows difficult to predict.

Based on the negotiation between Google and the Chinese government to allow access by Chinese citizens to a high-speed Chinese version of the Google search engine. In order to reach agreement with the Chinese government, Google had to agree to allow the government to censor access to some sites turned up by Google's search engine. In agreeing, Google compromised its open-access policy. There were inquiries into the agreement by the U.S. Congress and some outcry from U.S. citizens.

To learn how to analyze a negotiation from the perspective of each party when one is a government and the other a private-sector organization; a subpoint here is the difference between short-term and longer-term interests. To address the difficulties of balancing business ethics and financial objectives; an important point here is to address what it means to be ethical in a for-profit business environment. To understand the long-term effects of short-term actions.

“NTL suffered huge losses in its foreign exchange hedging activities as its highly complex leveraged structured products backfired badly in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis of 2007 and 2008. The CFO and the Treasury head have both been sacked, and Joshi, the new CFO, has embraced aggressive litigation as NTL's survival strategy to cope with the losses that threaten its solvency. In the meantime, NTL also faces tax investigations and whistleblower allegations of fraud, and it finds that the record-keeping of its derivative transactions was hopelessly incomplete and patchy. A complete reconstruction of the entire derivative transaction history is the only way to rebuild trust, and that task falls on Reddy, a seasoned derivatives expert brought in by the Board specifically for this purpose.

In this dire situation, Seth, the founder Chairman of NTL decides that NTL needs to put all this behind it and focus on rebuilding the business. The challenge for Seth, Joshi and Reddy is to go about doing this in an environment that offers very few rays of hope.”