×




The Flint Water Crisis Negotiation Strategy / MBA Resources

Introduction to Negotiation Strategy

Negotiation Strategy solution for The Flint Water Crisis case study


At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. The Flint Water Crisis case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Marie McKendall, Nancy M. Levenburg. The The Flint Water Crisis (referred as “Flint Water” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Organizational Development. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy , negotiation framework, Ethics, Leadership.

Negotiation strategy solution for case study The Flint Water Crisis ” 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 Flint Water Crisis Case Study


The city of Flint, Michigan, a previous hub for General Motors auto manufacturing, began to experience budget shortfalls in 2007. By 2011, the city was running a deficit of nearly $26 million, and the state assumed control of Flint through the appointment of an emergency manager. In 2014, immediately after state officials decided to begin sourcing Flint's tap water from the Flint River in order to save money, residents began complaining about the cost, color, and quality of their water. Over the next 18 months, residents reported suffering from various illnesses and an outbreak of Legionnaire's Disease occurred in the area. During this time, state officials continued to assure residents that their water was safe despite three water-boil advisories, the water rusting parts at General Motors' Flint engine plant, and the straightforward warnings from an EPA employee that an unsafe situation existed. Public pressure built as an ACLU reporter broke the story, an outside researcher's tests uncovered unsafe levels of lead in the water, and a Michigan State University pediatrician found elevated lead levels in children coinciding with the switch to Flint River water. In October of 2015, Flint switched back to sourcing water from Detroit; finally, in January of 2016, Michigan's Governor (Rick Snyder) declared a state of emergency and activated the Michigan National Guard to patrol the city and assist the American Red Cross with the distribution of bottled water and water filters. The citizens of Flint had been exposed to poisoned water for 18 months. What went wrong? What dysfunctions and conditions in federal and state organizations led to flawed decision making and catastrophic outcomes? The case provides a general overview of the city of Flint, events leading up to the Flint water crisis, information about the involved government agencies, and a chronology of the tap water sourcing decision. The case prompts readers to analyze and understand that a variety of factors, including multiple actors, ambiguities, corporate structures, and organizational complexities can combine to result in unethical decisions and outcomes.


Case Authors : Marie McKendall, Nancy M. Levenburg

Topic : Organizational Development

Related Areas : Ethics, Leadership




Seven Elemental Tools of Negotiation that can be used in The Flint Water Crisis 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, 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.


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 Flint Water Crisis” 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.


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 and other people doing the mediation. According to “Marie McKendall, Nancy M. Levenburg”, 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 Flint Water Crisis ”, 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 Flint Water Crisis” 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 Flint Water Crisis



References & Further Readings

Marie McKendall, Nancy M. Levenburg (2018), "The Flint Water Crisis Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.


New Sports SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Software & Programming


Maisons du Monde SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Consumer Cyclical , Furniture & Fixtures


Simmtech SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Semiconductors


S Science Co Ltd SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Basic Materials , Misc. Fabricated Products


Media Chinese Int SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Services , Printing & Publishing


Alkermes Plc SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs


Terasaki Electric SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Electronic Instr. & Controls


Options Media Group SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Software & Programming


The Dhampur Sugar Mills SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Food Processing


Prosperity Intl HK SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Basic Materials , Misc. Fabricated Products