Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
Strategy & Execution
Strategy / MBA Resources
Case Study SWOT Analysis Solution
Case Study Description of Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation
Two psychological traps, anchoring and framing, and their role in negotiation are described. The anchoring section describes how first or opening offers can be used effectively in negotiation. Examines how opening offers serve as an anchor, changing one side's perception of the other side's bottom line and hence the set of possible outcomes. The framing section describes how framing--alternative description of an object, event, or situation--can be used effectively in negotiation. Uses a real-estate dialogue to illustrate three common varieties of framing: losses versus gains, short and long horizons, and aggregation and segregation.
Swot Analysis of "Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation" written by George Wu includes – strengths weakness that are internal strategic factors of the organization, and opportunities and threats that Framing Anchoring facing as an external strategic factors. Some of the topics covered in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation case study are - Strategic Management Strategies, and Strategy & Execution.
Some of the macro environment factors that can be used to understand the Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation casestudy better are - – challanges to central banks by blockchain based private currencies, central banks are concerned over increasing inflation, digital marketing is dominated by two big players Facebook and Google, increasing household debt because of falling income levels, there is backlash against globalization, increasing inequality as vast percentage of new income is going to the top 1%, increasing energy prices,
increasing transportation and logistics costs, competitive advantages are harder to sustain because of technology dispersion, etc
Introduction to SWOT Analysis of Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation
SWOT stands for an organization’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats . At Oak Spring University , we believe that protagonist in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation case study can use SWOT analysis as a strategic management tool to assess the current internal strengths and weaknesses of the Framing Anchoring, and to figure out the opportunities and threats in the macro environment – technological, environmental, political, economic, social, demographic, etc in which Framing Anchoring operates in.
According to Harvard Business Review, 75% of the managers use SWOT analysis for various purposes such as – evaluating current scenario, strategic planning, new venture feasibility, personal growth goals, new market entry, Go To market strategies, portfolio management and strategic trade-off assessment, organizational restructuring, etc.
SWOT Objectives / Importance of SWOT Analysis and SWOT Matrix
SWOT analysis of Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation can be done for the following purposes –
1. Strategic planning using facts provided in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation case study
2. Improving business portfolio management of Framing Anchoring
3. Assessing feasibility of the new initiative in Strategy & Execution field.
4. Making a Strategy & Execution topic specific business decision
5. Set goals for the organization
6. Organizational restructuring of Framing Anchoring
Strengths Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation | Internal Strategic Factors
What are Strengths in SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The strengths of Framing Anchoring in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation Harvard Business Review case study are -
Ability to recruit top talent
– Framing Anchoring is one of the leading recruiters in the industry. Managers in the Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation are in a position to attract the best talent available. The firm has a robust talent identification program that helps in identifying the brightest.
Training and development
– Framing Anchoring has one of the best training and development program in the industry. The effectiveness of the training programs can be measured in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation Harvard Business Review case study by analyzing – employees retention, in-house promotion, loyalty, new venture initiation, lack of conflict, and high level of both employees and customer engagement.
Learning organization
- Framing Anchoring is a learning organization. It has inculcated three key characters of learning organization in its processes and operations – exploration, creativity, and expansiveness. The work place at Framing Anchoring is open place that encourages instructiveness, ideation, open minded discussions, and creativity. Employees and leaders in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation Harvard Business Review case study emphasize – knowledge, initiative, and innovation.
Innovation driven organization
– Framing Anchoring is one of the most innovative firm in sector. Manager in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation Harvard Business Review case study can use Clayton Christensen Disruptive Innovation strategies to further increase the scale of innovtions in the organization.
Analytics focus
– Framing Anchoring is putting a lot of focus on utilizing the power of analytics in business decision making. This has put it among the leading players in the industry. The technology infrastructure suggested by George Wu can also help it to harness the power of analytics for – marketing optimization, demand forecasting, customer relationship management, inventory management, information sharing across the value chain etc.
Successful track record of launching new products
– Framing Anchoring has launched numerous new products in last few years, keeping in mind evolving customer preferences and competitive pressures. Framing Anchoring has effective processes in place that helps in exploring new product needs, doing quick pilot testing, and then launching the products quickly using its extensive distribution network.
Ability to lead change in Strategy & Execution field
– Framing Anchoring is one of the leading players in its industry. Over the years it has not only transformed the business landscape in its segment but also across the whole industry. The ability to lead change has enabled Framing Anchoring in – penetrating new markets, reaching out to new customers, and providing different value propositions to different customers in the international markets.
High brand equity
– Framing Anchoring has strong brand awareness and brand recognition among both - the exiting customers and potential new customers. Strong brand equity has enabled Framing Anchoring to keep acquiring new customers and building profitable relationship with both the new and loyal customers.
Strong track record of project management
– Framing Anchoring is known for sticking to its project targets. This enables the firm to manage – time, project costs, and have sustainable margins on the projects.
Highly skilled collaborators
– Framing Anchoring has highly efficient outsourcing and offshoring strategy. It has resulted in greater operational flexibility and bringing down the costs in highly price sensitive segment. Secondly the value chain collaborators of the firm in Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation HBR case study have helped the firm to develop new products and bring them quickly to the marketplace.
Sustainable margins compare to other players in Strategy & Execution industry
– Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation firm has clearly differentiated products in the market place. This has enabled Framing Anchoring to fetch slight price premium compare to the competitors in the Strategy & Execution industry. The sustainable margins have also helped Framing Anchoring to invest into research and development (R&D) and innovation.
Effective Research and Development (R&D)
– Framing Anchoring has innovation driven culture where significant part of the revenues are spent on the research and development activities. This has resulted in, as mentioned in case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation - staying ahead in the industry in terms of – new product launches, superior customer experience, highly competitive pricing strategies, and great returns to the shareholders.
Weaknesses Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation | Internal Strategic Factors
What are Weaknesses in SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The weaknesses of Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation are -
Ability to respond to the competition
– As the decision making is very deliberative, highlighted in the case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation, in the dynamic environment Framing Anchoring has struggled to respond to the nimble upstart competition. Framing Anchoring has reasonably good record with similar level competitors but it has struggled with new entrants taking away niches of its business.
Workers concerns about automation
– As automation is fast increasing in the segment, Framing Anchoring needs to come up with a strategy to reduce the workers concern regarding automation. Without a clear strategy, it could lead to disruption and uncertainty within the organization.
Aligning sales with marketing
– It come across in the case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation that the firm needs to have more collaboration between its sales team and marketing team. Sales professionals in the industry have deep experience in developing customer relationships. Marketing department in the case Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation can leverage the sales team experience to cultivate customer relationships as Framing Anchoring is planning to shift buying processes online.
Capital Spending Reduction
– Even during the low interest decade, Framing Anchoring has not been able to do capital spending to the tune of the competition. This has resulted into fewer innovations and company facing stiff competition from both existing competitors and new entrants who are disrupting the industry using digital technology.
Increasing silos among functional specialists
– The organizational structure of Framing Anchoring is dominated by functional specialists. It is not different from other players in the Strategy & Execution segment. Framing Anchoring needs to de-silo the office environment to harness the true potential of its workforce. Secondly the de-silo will also help Framing Anchoring to focus more on services rather than just following the product oriented approach.
High bargaining power of channel partners
– Because of the regulatory requirements, George Wu suggests that, Framing Anchoring is facing high bargaining power of the channel partners. So far it has not able to streamline the operations to reduce the bargaining power of the value chain partners in the industry.
Need for greater diversity
– Framing Anchoring has taken concrete steps on diversity, equity, and inclusion. But the efforts so far has resulted in limited success. It needs to expand the recruitment and selection process to hire more people from the minorities and underprivileged background.
High dependence on star products
– The top 2 products and services of the firm as mentioned in the Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation HBR case study still accounts for major business revenue. This dependence on star products in has resulted into insufficient focus on developing new products, even though Framing Anchoring has relatively successful track record of launching new products.
High dependence on existing supply chain
– The disruption in the global supply chains because of the Covid-19 pandemic and blockage of the Suez Canal illustrated the fragile nature of Framing Anchoring supply chain. Even after few cautionary changes mentioned in the HBR case study - Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation, it is still heavily dependent upon the existing supply chain. The existing supply chain though brings in cost efficiencies but it has left Framing Anchoring vulnerable to further global disruptions in South East Asia.
Skills based hiring
– The stress on hiring functional specialists at Framing Anchoring has created an environment where the organization is dominated by functional specialists rather than management generalist. This has resulted into product oriented approach rather than marketing oriented approach or consumers oriented approach.
Low market penetration in new markets
– Outside its home market of Framing Anchoring, firm in the HBR case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation needs to spend more promotional, marketing, and advertising efforts to penetrate international markets.
Opportunities Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation | External Strategic Factors
What are Opportunities in the SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The opportunities highlighted in the Harvard Business Review case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation are -
Leveraging digital technologies
– Framing Anchoring can leverage digital technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning to automate the production process, customer analytics to get better insights into consumer behavior, realtime digital dashboards to get better sales tracking, logistics and transportation, product tracking, etc.
Lowering marketing communication costs
– 5G expansion will open new opportunities for Framing Anchoring in the field of marketing communication. It will bring down the cost of doing business, provide technology platform to build new products in the Strategy & Execution segment, and it will provide faster access to the consumers.
Reconfiguring business model
– The expansion of digital payment system, the bringing down of international transactions costs using Bitcoin and other blockchain based currencies, etc can help Framing Anchoring to reconfigure its entire business model. For example it can used blockchain based technologies to reduce piracy of its products in the big markets such as China. Secondly it can use the popularity of e-commerce in various developing markets to build a Direct to Customer business model rather than the current Channel Heavy distribution network.
Using analytics as competitive advantage
– Framing Anchoring has spent a significant amount of money and effort to integrate analytics and machine learning into its operations in the sector. This continuous investment in analytics has enabled, as illustrated in the Harvard case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation - to build a competitive advantage using analytics. The analytics driven competitive advantage can help Framing Anchoring to build faster Go To Market strategies, better consumer insights, developing relevant product features, and building a highly efficient supply chain.
Loyalty marketing
– Framing Anchoring has focused on building a highly responsive customer relationship management platform. This platform is built on in-house data and driven by analytics and artificial intelligence. The customer analytics can help the organization to fine tune its loyalty marketing efforts, increase the wallet share of the organization, reduce wastage on mainstream advertising spending, build better pricing strategies using personalization, etc.
Reforming the budgeting process
- By establishing new metrics that will be used to evaluate both existing and potential projects Framing Anchoring can not only reduce the costs of the project but also help it in integrating the projects with other processes within the organization.
Learning at scale
– Online learning technologies has now opened space for Framing Anchoring to conduct training and development for its employees across the world. This will result in not only reducing the cost of training but also help employees in different part of the world to integrate with the headquarter work culture, ethos, and standards.
Low interest rates
– Even though inflation is raising its head in most developed economies, Framing Anchoring can still utilize the low interest rates to borrow money for capital investment. Secondly it can also use the increase of government spending in infrastructure projects to get new business.
Finding new ways to collaborate
– Covid-19 has not only transformed business models of companies in Strategy & Execution industry, but it has also influenced the consumer preferences. Framing Anchoring can tie-up with other value chain partners to explore new opportunities regarding meeting customer demands and building a rewarding and engaging relationship.
Changes in consumer behavior post Covid-19
– Consumer behavior has changed in the Strategy & Execution industry because of Covid-19 restrictions. Some of this behavior will stay once things get back to normal. Framing Anchoring can take advantage of these changes in consumer behavior to build a far more efficient business model. For example consumer regular ordering of products can reduce both last mile delivery costs and market penetration costs. Framing Anchoring can further use this consumer data to build better customer loyalty, provide better products and service collection, and improve the value proposition in inflationary times.
Buying journey improvements
– Framing Anchoring can improve the customer journey of consumers in the industry by using analytics and artificial intelligence. Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation suggest that firm can provide automated chats to help consumers solve their own problems, provide online suggestions to get maximum out of the products and services, and help consumers to build a community where they can interact with each other to develop new features and uses.
Developing new processes and practices
– Framing Anchoring can develop new processes and procedures in Strategy & Execution industry using technology such as automation using artificial intelligence, real time transportation and products tracking, 3D modeling for concept development and new products pilot testing etc.
Use of Bitcoin and other crypto currencies for transactions
– The popularity of Bitcoin and other crypto currencies as asset class and medium of transaction has opened new opportunities for Framing Anchoring in the consumer business. Now Framing Anchoring can target international markets with far fewer capital restrictions requirements than the existing system.
Threats Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation External Strategic Factors
What are Threats in the SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The threats mentioned in the HBR case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation are -
Capital market disruption
– During the Covid-19, Dow Jones has touched record high. The valuations of a number of companies are way beyond their existing business model potential. This can lead to capital market correction which can put a number of suppliers, collaborators, value chain partners in great financial difficulty. It will directly impact the business of Framing Anchoring.
Instability in the European markets
– European Union markets are facing three big challenges post Covid – expanded balance sheets, Brexit related business disruption, and aggressive Russia looking to distract the existing security mechanism. Framing Anchoring will face different problems in different parts of Europe. For example it will face inflationary pressures in UK, France, and Germany, balance sheet expansion and demand challenges in Southern European countries, and geopolitical instability in the Eastern Europe.
Technology disruption because of hacks, piracy etc
– The colonial pipeline illustrated, how vulnerable modern organization are to international hackers, miscreants, and disruptors. The cyber security interruption, data leaks, etc can seriously jeopardize the future growth of the organization.
Technology acceleration in Forth Industrial Revolution
– Framing Anchoring has witnessed rapid integration of technology during Covid-19 in the Strategy & Execution industry. As one of the leading players in the industry, Framing Anchoring needs to keep up with the evolution of technology in the Strategy & Execution sector. According to Mckinsey study top managers believe that the adoption of technology in operations, communications is 20-25 times faster than what they planned in the beginning of 2019.
Trade war between China and United States
– The trade war between two of the biggest economies can hugely impact the opportunities for Framing Anchoring in the Strategy & Execution industry. The Strategy & Execution industry is already at various protected from local competition in China, with the rise of trade war the protection levels may go up. This presents a clear threat of current business model in Chinese market.
Environmental challenges
– Framing Anchoring needs to have a robust strategy against the disruptions arising from climate change and energy requirements. EU has identified it as key priority area and spending 30% of its 880 billion Euros European post Covid-19 recovery funds on green technology. Framing Anchoring can take advantage of this fund but it will also bring new competitors in the Strategy & Execution industry.
Increasing wage structure of Framing Anchoring
– Post Covid-19 there is a sharp increase in the wages especially in the jobs that require interaction with people. The increasing wages can put downward pressure on the margins of Framing Anchoring.
High level of anxiety and lack of motivation
– the Great Resignation in United States is the sign of broader dissatisfaction among the workforce in United States. Framing Anchoring needs to understand the core reasons impacting the Strategy & Execution industry. This will help it in building a better workplace.
New competition
– After the dotcom bust of 2001, financial crisis of 2008-09, the business formation in US economy had declined. But in 2020 alone, there are more than 1.5 million new business applications in United States. This can lead to greater competition for Framing Anchoring in the Strategy & Execution sector and impact the bottomline of the organization.
Learning curve for new practices
– As the technology based on artificial intelligence and machine learning platform is getting complex, as highlighted in case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation, Framing Anchoring may face longer learning curve for training and development of existing employees. This can open space for more nimble competitors in the field of Strategy & Execution .
Easy access to finance
– Easy access to finance in Strategy & Execution field will also reduce the barriers to entry in the industry, thus putting downward pressure on the prices because of increasing competition. Framing Anchoring can utilize it by borrowing at lower rates and invest it into research and development, capital expenditure to fortify its core competitive advantage.
Increasing international competition and downward pressure on margins
– Apart from technology driven competitive advantage dilution, Framing Anchoring can face downward pressure on margins from increasing competition from international players. The international players have stable revenue in their home market and can use those resources to penetrate prominent markets illustrated in HBR case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation .
Regulatory challenges
– Framing Anchoring needs to prepare for regulatory challenges as consumer protection groups and other pressure groups are vigorously advocating for more regulations on big business - to reduce inequality, to create a level playing field, to product data privacy and consumer privacy, to reduce the influence of big money on democratic institutions, etc. This can lead to significant changes in the Strategy & Execution industry regulations.
Weighted SWOT Analysis of Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation Template, Example
Not all factors mentioned under the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats quadrants in the SWOT Analysis are equal. Managers in the HBR case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation needs to zero down on the relative importance of each factor mentioned in the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats quadrants.
We can provide the relative importance to each factor by assigning relative weights. Weighted SWOT analysis process is a three stage process –
First stage for doing weighted SWOT analysis of the case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation is to rank the strengths and weaknesses of the organization. This will help you to assess the most important strengths and weaknesses of the firm and which one of the strengths and weaknesses mentioned in the initial lists are marginal and can be left out.
Second stage for conducting weighted SWOT analysis of the Harvard case study Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation is to give probabilities to the external strategic factors thus better understanding the opportunities and threats arising out of macro environment changes and developments.
Third stage of constructing weighted SWOT analysis of Two Psychological Traps in Negotiation is to provide strategic recommendations includes – joining likelihood of external strategic factors such as opportunities and threats to the internal strategic factors – strengths and weaknesses. You should start with external factors as they will provide the direction of the overall industry. Secondly by joining probabilities with internal strategic factors can help the company not only strategic fit but also the most probably strategic trade-off that Framing Anchoring needs to make to build a sustainable competitive advantage.
