Introduction to Negotiation Strategy
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Jennifer Walske, Laura D'Andrea Tyson. The Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy (referred as “Bridges U.k” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Finance & Accounting. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy, negotiation framework, Financial management, Government, Social responsibility.
Negotiation strategy solution for case study Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy ” 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?
This case focuses on Bridges Fund Management (Bridges), an early leader in the impact investing space, with offices located in both the U.K. and the U.S. Bridges has been in operation for fifteen years and has raised, through early 2017, over $1billion in capital across its 12 funds. While the firm was originally founded by two members the U.K.'s Social Investment Task Force (SITF), Sir Ronald Cohen (now Advisory Board Chair) and Michele Giddens (now one of Bridges most senior partners), the firm now has seventeen partners located either in its U.K. or U.S. offices. Bridges' third co-founder, Philip Newborough, serves as Bridges' overall Managing Partner. The case asks: how might the changing political environment in both the U.S. and U.K. in early 2017 impact Bridges in its ability to raise future funds and in the level of support (financial or otherwise) available to its investments, also known as portfolio companies? Bridges addresses social issues by investing in companies that provide both a financial return and social impact. For example, Bridges improves unemployment through investments in the Babington Group which provides job training to youth; improves healthcare and well-being by investments in Alina and Home Care which serve aging populations; and improves access to housing through its property funds with investments in the Old Vinyl Factory in the U.K. and the Spoke housing complex in the U.S.
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 “Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy” 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 “Jennifer Walske, Laura D'Andrea Tyson”, 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 “Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy ”, 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 “Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.
Jennifer Walske, Laura D'Andrea Tyson (2018), "Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy 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 Bridges Fund Management: Navigating Changes in the Political Economy
Financial , Insurance (Life)
Technology , Computer Peripherals
Capital Goods , Construction - Raw Materials
Basic Materials , Chemical Manufacturing
Technology , Computer Services
Basic Materials , Chemical Manufacturing
Financial , Misc. Financial Services
Capital Goods , Misc. Capital Goods
Basic Materials , Metal Mining
Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs
Transportation , Airline
Services , Casinos & Gaming
