×




The National Football League and Brain Injuries Negotiation Strategy / MBA Resources

Introduction to Negotiation Strategy

Negotiation Strategy solution for The National Football League and Brain Injuries case study


At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. The National Football League and Brain Injuries case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Richard G. Hamermesh, Matthew Preble. The The National Football League and Brain Injuries (referred as “Nfl Injuries” 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, Labor, Personnel policies.

Negotiation strategy solution for case study The National Football League and Brain Injuries ” 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.


BATNA in Negotiation Strategy


Three questions every negotiator should ask before entering into a negotiation process-

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?



12 Hrs

$59.99
per Page
  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • On Time Delivery | 27x7
  • PayPal Secure
  • 300 Words / Page
  • Buy Now

24 Hrs

$49.99
per Page
  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • On Time Delivery | 27x7
  • PayPal Secure
  • 300 Words / Page
  • Buy Now

48 Hrs

$39.99
per Page
  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • On Time Delivery | 27x7
  • PayPal Secure
  • 300 Words / Page
  • Buy Now




Case Description of The National Football League and Brain Injuries Case Study


The National Football League (NFL) was both the most popular spectator sport in the U.S. and a major economic entity, taking in roughly $10 billion a year in revenue. However through the early twenty-first century, an increased understanding of the long-term effects of head injuries on NFL players indicated a serious threat to the long-term viability of the game. Particularly concerning was the indication that some deceased professional football players had developed chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE)-a neurodegenerative disease which had a strong influence on a person's mental and physical health-most likely as a result of repetitive hits sustained during their football careers and which may have contributed to their deaths. Over 4,000 retired players had jointly sued the NFL over the head injuries they had sustained during their time in the NFL and the resulting health problems they attributed to these injuries. In part, the lawsuit alleged that the NFL had not been forthcoming with players about the health risks of head injuries. The two sides had reached a tentative $765 million settlement in 2013, the bulk of which would go to compensating retired players suffering from such diseases as Alzheimer's or dementia. While this settlement compensated retired players, it was not applicable to current or future players. Could the NFL preserve the sport by making it safer through new rules or equipment changes, or was football an inherently physical game that no amount of new rules or equipment could make completely safe? Were current and future players, now knowing full well the potential long-term health implications of football, tacitly accepting the risks involved? As a team owner, is now the time to sell while franchise value and fan support are at their peaks, or will the business of the NFL be viable for years to come?


Case Authors : Richard G. Hamermesh, Matthew Preble

Topic : Strategy & Execution

Related Areas : Labor, Personnel policies




Seven Elemental Tools of Negotiation that can be used in The National Football League and Brain Injuries solution


1. Satisfies everyone’s core interests (yours and theirs)


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.





2. Is the best of many options

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.


3. Meets legitimate, fair standards

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.


4. Is better than your alternatives or BATNA

Every negotiators going into the negotiations should always work out the “what if” scenario. The negotiating parties in the “The National Football League and Brain Injuries” 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.


5. Is comprised of clear, realistic commitments

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.


6. Is the result of effective communication?

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.


7. Managing relationship with counterparty

Another critical factor in the success of your negotiation is how you manage your relationship with your counterpart. According to “Richard G. Hamermesh, Matthew Preble”, 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.




Different types of negotiators – what is your style of negotiation

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 “The National Football League and Brain Injuries ”, 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 “The National Football League and Brain Injuries” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.





NPV Analysis of The National Football League and Brain Injuries



References & Further Readings

Richard G. Hamermesh, Matthew Preble (2018), "The National Football League and Brain Injuries Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.


Invesco Asia SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Financial , Misc. Financial Services


GSE SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Utilities , Natural Gas Utilities


Buana Finance SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Financial , Consumer Financial Services


Endava SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Software & Programming


Oncosil Medical Ltd SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs


Beijing Sanyuan Foods SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Food Processing


REXLot Holdings SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Computer Peripherals