Introduction to Negotiation Strategy
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. Mark Logic case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Andrew Isaacs, Emily Norman. The Mark Logic (referred as “Mark Logic” 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, .
Negotiation strategy solution for case study Mark Logic ” 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?
The Mark Logic case study takes place in 2004 when Paul Pedersen, founder of Mark Logic, is at a crossroads about which business strategy to pursue. Mark Logic was founded by Pedersen, the former Lead Software Architect for Google, and Chris Linblad, the Principal Engineer and creator of the search engine at Ultraseek. In founding Mark Logic, Pedersen and Linblad had the vision of developing a product that would apply the same concepts of a traditional web search engine to quickly and efficiently locate and manage enterprise content such as PDF documents, textbooks, newspaper articles, tabular reference data, technical manuals, company financial reports, clinic trial data, and other information that is not easily accessible using simple keyword searches. By adapting web search technology to be used for identifying specific information within documents and other content, Pederson and Linblad hoped to create a technology that could integrate all of a company's key content into a searchable database. By 2004, Mark Logic was serving six clients that included two of the world's top five publishing companies, a US Air Force research enter, the Alberta provincial government, the Cedars-Sinai medical research center, and the University of Virginia Press. Despite Mark Logic's early success, Pederson now was at a crossroads in terms of strategy. Specifically, he was considering three key strategies: a horizontal strategy, a vertical strategy, and an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) partnership strategy. The horizontal strategy would call for developing specific applications that would appeal to customers in various industries. For example, Mark Logic could produce a call center application, a project management application, and a contract management application. The vertical strategy would call for developing generalized applications for specific industries. For example, Mark Logic could develop an application for pharmaceutical companies that allow them to analyze clinical data and manage FDA approval documentation in a single application. The OEM partnership strategy would involve creating a community of developers who leverage the content of Mark Logic's software to create a range of applications for various uses.
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. 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 “Mark Logic” 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 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. According to “Andrew Isaacs, Emily Norman”, 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 “Mark Logic ”, 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 “Mark Logic” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.
Andrew Isaacs, Emily Norman (2018), "Mark Logic 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 Mark Logic
Utilities , Electric Utilities
Technology , Software & Programming
Capital Goods , Misc. Capital Goods
Technology , Software & Programming
Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Tobacco
Financial , Investment Services
Technology , Software & Programming
Basic Materials , Misc. Fabricated Products
Capital Goods , Constr. - Supplies & Fixtures
Healthcare , Medical Equipment & Supplies
Basic Materials , Chemicals - Plastics & Rubber
Capital Goods , Constr. - Supplies & Fixtures
