Introduction to Negotiation Strategy
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Hau Lee, Sonali Rammohan. The Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry (referred as “Deforestation Cattle” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Leadership & Managing People. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy, negotiation framework, Financial markets, Government, Growth strategy, Risk management, Supply chain, Sustainability.
Negotiation strategy solution for case study Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry ” 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?
In June 2009, Greenpeace accused the cattle industry of contributing to deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Big brands that bought beef and leather were named as silent partners to the practice. Pressure from Greenpeace and the Brazilian government led to major changes. Meatpackers Bertin, JBS, Marfrig, and Minerva, responsible for one-third of exports, agreed to stop purchasing directly and indirectly from ranches that cleared more forest than legally permitted, and committed to buying from direct and indirect suppliers that reduced deforestation to zero. Fernando Sampaio, executive director of Abiec, the Brazilian Beef Exporters Association, worked closely with meatpackers that exported beef to comply with deforestation agreements. While Abiec's mission was to grow the export sector, his members were now asked to take an active role in curbing deforestation. Progress was promising. Deforestation dropped by over 80 percent from 2004 to 2014, attributable in part to the cattle agreements. This was clear progress, since the cattle sector in the Amazon was one of the largest drivers of global deforestation. Yet, traceability of animal movements among farms and slaughterhouses was a big challenge. Some non-compliant ranches were selling to slaughterhouses without full monitoring systems. Other non-compliant ranches were selling cattle into legitimate supply chains through licensed ranches. By mid-2015, Brazilian Amazon deforestation had grown by 16 percent compared to the prior year, demonstrating that gains were fragile. How could Abiec, which represented 29 meatpackers responsible for 70 percent of slaughtering and 93 percent of exports, persuade more members to adopt a zero-deforestation policy and demand supplier compliance? Sampaio's goal of growing sales for his members while curbing deforestation was complex and required working with many beef value chain actors. Industry collaboration, traceability approaches, monitoring efforts, rancher penalties and incentives, productivity improvement efforts, impact investments, and building capabilities of indirect suppliers had produced significant changes. Yet, Abiec needed to influence its smaller members and tackle indirect suppliers - the ones often linked to deforestation. Could cattle-driven deforestation ever be contained?
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 “Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry” 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 “Hau Lee, Sonali Rammohan”, 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 “Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry ”, 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 “Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.
Hau Lee, Sonali Rammohan (2018), "Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry 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 Beef in Brazil: Shrinking Deforestation While Growing the Industry
Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Food Processing
Capital Goods , Construction Services
Healthcare , Healthcare Facilities
Energy , Coal
Consumer Cyclical , Apparel/Accessories
Technology , Communications Equipment
Consumer Cyclical , Apparel/Accessories
Services , Real Estate Operations
Healthcare , Major Drugs
Capital Goods , Misc. Capital Goods
Capital Goods , Construction Services
Consumer Cyclical , Furniture & Fixtures
