Search results

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.

The dilemma down under is a two-party distributive negotiation with integrative potential. A large airline, Transpacific Airlines (TPA), created an internal tour operator brand named Transpacific Vacations as a separate profit center. After licensing its brand to Global Tour Services and establishing operations in the UK, negotiations to take over the internal tour operations of TPA-Australia are about to begin. The case involves the negotiation between Mr Edwards, representative of GTS, and Ms Bentley, representative of TPA-Australia.

The dilemma down under is based on a real negotiation with altered names and facts. All names of companies have been changed. All names of protagonists have been changed. The year of the case has also been altered. The case was created after an extensive interview with an individual engaged in the actual negotiation.

Students in courses related to negotiation and/or decision making. The case also works in international management/strategy courses where students are asked to apply market entry mode decisions along with the accompanying negotiations. The case is most appropriate for undergraduate courses, but can be used for graduate courses. The case can easily be used with common negotiation textbooks, such as Negotiation, 7th edition by Lewicki et al. (2014).

The exercise will be able to reinforce basic distributive negotiation concepts, including identifying issues, positions, interests, alternatives to a negotiated agreement, reservation (resistance) points, target (aspiration) points and opening bids, while at the same time challenge students to look for integrative potential among and across the issues. The case also provides an opportunity to explore the connection between negotiation and international market entry choice.

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.

Human resource management, business ethics, public policy.

The case can also be taught in MBA/postgraduate in management programmes in general management or HR classes to give a lesson in organizational conflict and resolution, negotiation skills (strategies, tactics and power in negotiation) towards the middle or end of the course. The course can also be taught in MBA/postgraduate in management programmes in business ethics classes to make students appreciate the various approaches to ethics – end-results, duty, social contract and personalistic ethics. It also helps students learn how to institute ethics into the cultural fabric of the organization. In public policy programmes, it could be taught to illustrate the crucial role and at times unintended outcomes of actions of street level bureaucracies in policy implementation. The course can also be taught in refresher training programmes for executives to give lessons in conflict management, mediation strategies, union negotiations and ethics.

This teaching case is based on a real incident that took place in a defence production factory of India in the year 2009. It succinctly unfolds a small showdown between two officers that acquires a disproportionate size and explosive dimension and vitiates the environment of the entire organization. The case is a narration of a small row that in no time became a full-blown organizational dispute with layers of issues. Two officers, one very senior and the other influential, got entangled in a conflict, unfortunately in the presence of a large audience; dissatisfied workers and officers fanned the sentiments and encouraged them to unethically leverage legal privileges by gaming in the name of caste and sexual harassment to gain power in the messy dispute. The protagonist Ram Sharma, the General Manager (head) of the factory, is in a precarious situation as the conflict not only puts his managerial skills but also his moral standards and ethics to test.

After discussion and analysis of this case, the students should be able to: appreciate and evaluate the complexities and multiple facets of an organizational conflict including ethical challenges faced in a real life situation, recommend the options and course of action a manager could resort to in a high stake and time bound situation, learn to develop a basic framework for analysing, negotiations and strategize to resolve a conflict as a manager-mediator in such a situation, learn to handle difficult negotiation bound by complexities of unethical and legal disputes, answer to themselves the criticality of ground level bureaucracy's role in implementation of public policies (optional if the faculty decides to discuss the part provided in the teaching note). For international students, this is a case to learn dynamics of “negotiations in Indian context”. Overall development of critical thinking and analytical skills.

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

Set in May 2000, these cases reflect the separate perspectives of the CEOs as they approach the negotiations of TSE International to acquire Yeats Valves. The task for the student is to complete a valuation analysis of the target and buyer, and to negotiate a price and exchange ratio with the counterparty. Each case contains a financial forecast only for that side; therefore, an important element in the negotiation is to obtain the private information of the other side, analyze it, and successfully negotiate terms of acquisition. The cases are relatively simple, and are offered as a first exercise in the valuation of the firm, and negotiation of an acquisition. They may be taught singly in usual case-discussion fashion, or combined into a joint-negotiation exercise where students are assigned parts to play. Used in a bilateral bargaining exercise, two teams of students are designated, each team representing one side of the negotiation and receiving a case designed for that team. The bargaining exercise provides a particular opportunity for joint teaching among instructors in finance, strategy, human behavior, and negotiation.

This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Chrysler Corporation: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1240). Set in February 1998, the case places students in the position of negotiators for the company; their task is to value both firms, assess the potential earnings dilution of a combination, and negotiate a detailed agreement with their counterpart. The case can be used to explore such interesting negotiation issues as determination of a share-exchange ratio, treatment of major stockholders, and structuring a deal. Also, the case and exercise can be used to spark a discussion of acquisition in comparison with strategic alliance, or other less formal models of combination.

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.

This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Daimler-Benz A. G.: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1241). Set in February 1998, the case places students in the position of negotiators for the company; their task is to value both firms, assess the potential earnings dilution of a combination, and negotiate a detailed agreement with their counterpart. The case can be used to explore such interesting negotiation issues as determination of a share-exchange ratio, treatment of major stockholders, and structuring a deal. Also, the case and exercise can be used to spark a discussion of acquisition in comparison with strategic alliance, or other less formal models of combination.

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.

This case describes and analyzes the negotiations surrounding the U.S.–Thailand free trade agreement (FTA) that never materialized. The case offers an excellent opportunity to discuss the complexities of trade negotiations, the welfare analyses of FTAs (with trade diversion and creation), and the growth of FTAs and customs unions (CUs) as opposed to multilateral trade liberalizations.