Introduction to Negotiation Strategy
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Margaret L. Eaton, Rebecca Farkas, Daniel Greenwald. The Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility (referred as “Testing Genetic” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Sales & Marketing. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy , negotiation framework, Marketing, Product development.
Negotiation strategy solution for case study Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility ” provides a comprehensive framework to analyse all issues at hand and reach a unambiguous negotiated agreement. At Oak Spring University, we provide comprehensive negotiation strategies that have proven their worth both in the academic sphere and corporate world.
What’s my BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) – my walkaway option if the deal fails?
What are my most important interests, in ranked order?
What is the other side’s BATNA, and what are his interests?
Two companies, Myriad Genetics and OncorMed, competed to develop a genetic test for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility. Although the two companies had offered genetic testing only to women who participated in their research studies, in 1995, both were considering selling their testing services to physicians generally. Despite the promising market for this testing service, some scientists and patient activist groups believed that it was premature to provide testing outside a carefully controlled research environment, where data could be collected on an ongoing basis to answer significant questions about the health consequences of genetic mutations and the potential benefits and risks of testing. Specifically, they argued that commercialization should wait because knowledge about an inherited predisposition to breast cancer was still emerging, and medical care options for mutation carriers were limited and not proven to be of benefit. In addition, data on the psychological and social effects on women who were tested were still evolving. Those in favor of restricting such testing to the research setting wanted laws in place to protect individuals from irresponsible testing practices, loss of privacy, and genetic discrimination. Details the decisions that Myriad and OncorMed made regarding their testing services and how the two companies addressed the concerns of those outside the company.
By interests, we do not mean the preconceived demands or positions that you or the other party may have, but rather the underlying needs, aims, fears, and concerns that shape what you want. Negotiation is more than getting what you want. It is not winning at all cost. Number of times Win-Win is better option that outright winning or getting what you want.
Options are the solutions you generate that could meet your and your counterpart’s interests . Often people come to negotiations with very fixed ideas and things they want to achieve. This strategy leaves unexplored options which might be even better than the one that one party wanted to achieve. So always try to provide as many options as possible during the negotiation process . The best outcome should be out of many options rather than few options.
When soft bargainers meet hard bargainers there is always the danger of soft bargainers ceding more than what is necessary. To avoid this scenario you should always focus on legitimate standards or expectations, clearly understanding the arbitrage . Standards are often external and objective measures to assess the fairness such as rules and regulations, financial values & resources , market prices etc. If the negotiated agreement is going beyond the industry norms or established standards of fairness then it is prudent to get out of the negotiation.
Every negotiators going into the negotiations should always work out the “what if” scenario. The negotiating parties in the “Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility” has three to four plausible scenarios. The negotiating protagonist needs to have clear idea of – what will happen if the negotiations fail. To put it in the negotiating literature – BATNA - Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. If the negotiated agreement is not better than BATNA (Negotiations options), then there is no point in accepting the negotiated solution.
One of the biggest problems in implementing the negotiated agreements in corporate world is – the ambiguity in the negotiated agreement. Sometimes the negotiated agreements are not realistic or various parties interpret the outcomes based on their understanding of the situation. It is critical to do negotiations as water tight as possible so that there is less scope for ambiguity.
Many negotiators make the mistake of focusing only on the substance of the negotiation (interests, options, standards, and so on). How you communicate about that substance, however, can make all the difference. The language you use and the way that you build understanding, jointly solve problems, and together determine the process of the negotiation with your counterpart make your negotiation more efficient, yield clear agreements that each party understands, and help you build better relationships.
Another critical factor in the success of your negotiation is how you manage your relationship with your counterpart and other people doing the mediation. According to “Margaret L. Eaton, Rebecca Farkas, Daniel Greenwald”, the protagonist may want to establish a new connection or repair a damaged one; in any case, you want to build a strong working relationship built on mutual respect, well-established trust, and a side-by-side problem- solving approach.
According to
Harvard Business Review
, there are three types of negotiators – Hard Bargainers, Soft Bargainers, and Principled Bargainers.
Hard Bargainers – These people see negotiations as an activity that they need to win. They are less focused less on the real objectives of the negotiations but more on winning. In the “Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility ”, do you think a hard bargaining strategy will deliver desired results? Hard bargainers are easy to negotiate with as they often have a very
predictable strategy
Soft Bargainers – These people are focused on relationship rather than hard outcomes of the negotiations. It doesn’t mean they are pushovers. These negotiators often scribe to long term relationship rather than immediate bargain.
Principled Bargainers – As explained in the seven elemental tools of negotiations above, these negotiators are more concern about the standards and norms of fairness. They often have inclusive approach to negotiations and like to work on numerous solutions that can improve the BATNA of both parties.
Open lines of communication between parties in the case study “Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.
Margaret L. Eaton, Rebecca Farkas, Daniel Greenwald (2018), "Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.
Feel free to connect with us if you need business research.
You can download Excel Template of Case Study Solution & Analysis of Myriad and OncorMed and the Marketing of the First Genetic Tests for Breast Cancer Susceptibility
Transportation , Misc. Transportation
Transportation , Airline
Financial , Investment Services
Transportation , Misc. Transportation
Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs
Financial , Misc. Financial Services
Capital Goods , Construction - Raw Materials
Services , Retail (Department & Discount)
Capital Goods , Misc. Capital Goods
Consumer Cyclical , Furniture & Fixtures
Financial , Investment Services
Capital Goods , Misc. Capital Goods