Introduction to Negotiation Strategy
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. Watson Children's Shelter case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Bambi Douma, Jeffrey P. Shay, Michael Harrington. The Watson Children's Shelter (referred as “Watson Albrecht” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Strategy & Execution. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy , negotiation framework, Corporate governance.
Negotiation strategy solution for case study Watson Children's Shelter ” 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?
Watson Children's Shelter (Watson) was a private, independent, charitable non-profit organization located in Missoula, MT, that provided emergency shelter to children. Watson was a licensed emergency care provider, offering a safe, nurturing environment for children who were victims of physical, sexual, and/or emotional abuse, neglect, abandonment, or family crisis. Many of the children arriving at the shelter were severely emotionally disturbed or learning disabled. Other children arrived as victims of secondary abuse, coming from situations in which they observed domestic violence, substance or sexual abuse. Watson was founded in 1977 and had been under the leadership of Fran Albrecht since 1997. Albrecht had an excellent reputation as a leader and manager of this non-profit. It was June 2011 when Albrecht was deciding which of three alternatives to recommend to her Board of Directors, as Watson faced a tough operational situation. Watson and its Board had gone through a time-consuming due diligence process that led them to the decision to expand and build an additional facility. Within a year after the second facility was finished, placements of children had decreased dramatically; where Watson had been turning away approximately two children per week, it now had excess capacity in each facility and even had closed one facility part of the time. Albrecht's research into the decreased placements led her to a policy change by the main referring agency-it was now taking a "family preservation" approach rather than referring directly to an emergency provider such as Watson.It was a case of Albrecht and her Board having done lots of due diligence and then being blindsided by a decision made by an external constituent. She was concerned about the public perception and the impact on her organization and the Board members, as well as other stakeholders, including the children. She knew Watson had to adapt and act quickly, but she was not certain which alternative to take
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 “Watson Children's Shelter” 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 “Bambi Douma, Jeffrey P. Shay, Michael Harrington”, 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 “Watson Children's Shelter ”, 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 “Watson Children's Shelter” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.
Bambi Douma, Jeffrey P. Shay, Michael Harrington (2018), "Watson Children's Shelter 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 Watson Children's Shelter
Basic Materials , Gold & Silver
Financial , Misc. Financial Services
Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Food Processing
Transportation , Misc. Transportation
Capital Goods , Constr. - Supplies & Fixtures
Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs
Technology , Computer Services
Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Food Processing
Energy , Oil Well Services & Equipment
Financial , Misc. Financial Services