HSP 154H Great Issues in Social Science:
Negotiation and Dispute Resolution
Spring 2012
Professor Greg Saltzman
Office: Room 101 Robinson, tel. 0422, E-mail GSaltzman@albion.edu
Home telephone: (734) 971-7596 (not after 9:30 PM, please)
Office hours: TuTh 2:00 – 4:00 PM
Please feel free to stop by my office without an appointment, though you can make an
appointment if you wish. I am frequently in my Albion office at the following times:
Mondays
9:40-10:20 AM and 11:30-11:50 AM
Tuesdays
9:45-10:20 AM, 11:30-11:50 AM, and 2-4 PM
Wednesdays 9:40-10:20 AM and 11:30-11:50 AM
Thursdays
9:45-10:20 AM, 11:30-11:50 AM, and 2-4 PM
Fridays
Almost never (usually in Ann Arbor)
If you make prior arrangements with me, then I am also happy to meet with you in my office
most Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays from 11:50 AM to 12:50 PM.
Classes Mondays and Wednesdays, 2:15 – 4:05, Norris 100.
Course web: http://courses.albion.edu/course/view.php?id=336
An introductory study of the theories and concepts related to negotiation and dispute resolution
developed in such fields as microeconomics, psychology, labor relations, and international
relations. Includes many role-playing exercises to provide students with practice in negotiation.
Negotiation is the art and science of securing agreements between two or more interdependent
parties. In recent years, society has given increased attention to negotiation as a technique to
resolve many different kinds of disputes, including legal, managerial, environmental,
community, and family disputes. At the same time, the scholarly literature on negotiation and
dispute resolution has expanded rapidly.
The role-playing exercises in this course will put you in new and potentially uncomfortable
situations so that you will have the opportunity, in the relatively safe environment of the
classroom, to try out new behaviors and skills. Think of this course as a social skills laboratory
to develop a crucial leadership skill: negotiation and dispute resolution.
Learning objectives:
After completing this course, students will be able to:
 Apply concepts from microeconomics (e.g., game theory, Pareto efficiency), psychology
(e.g., cognitive biases), and labor relations (e.g., integrative bargaining) to analyze
negotiations
 Recognize how others perceive their negotiation behaviors and style of interaction
 Communicate more effectively, both orally and in writing
 Negotiate and resolve disputes with greater confidence and skill than before they enrolled
in this course.
2
Course Requirement
Negotiation journal, part 1
Negotiation journal, part 2
Negotiation journal, part 3
Reflections essay
Due Date
Wednesday, February 1
Monday, February 27
Wednesday, April 4
Monday, April 23
Grading Weight
20%
30%
40%
10%
Class attendance and participation can also substantially affect your grade.
REQUIRED READINGS
Required textbook: Leigh Thompson, The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator, 5th edition (2012).
Some journal articles and book chapters will be available on the course web.
In addition, each student will be required to pay a total of approximately $30 in copyright fees
for use of negotiation exercises sold by Northwestern University or Harvard University. I will
distribute paper copies of these exercises throughout the semester.
NEGOTIATION JOURNAL
You are required to maintain a journal as a vehicle for continuing reflection on your negotiation
experiences over the semester. The journal should have one entry for each role-playing class
exercise prior to April 4. Although there is no set minimum or maximum length for the journal
entries, 1-2 pages typed double-spaced per entry would be typical.
The journal entries are not a permanent record of each detail of what happened. I am only
interested in enough detail to understand the situation. The main purpose of each entry should be
to analyze the process and the outcome of the negotiation. Among the questions that you might
address are:

How did the actual process and outcome compare to the predictions of various writings on
negotiation? For example, the reading by Greenhalgh and Gilkey, “Our Game, Your
Rules,” asserts that men and women begin negotiation with very different cognitive frames.
Did the assertions in this article apply to the men and/or women in this negotiation?

What did you learn about negotiation from the experience and your reflection on it?

What surprised you about your behavior and that of the other party or parties?

Did you and the other party or parties make full use of opportunities for mutual gains? If not,
why not?

How did the history of the situation, the communication process, the distribution of power,
coalitions between parties, time pressures, etc. shape the outcome of the negotiation? Did
you achieve a less favorable outcome for yourself than you might have? If so, why?
 What did you learn about your values, assumptions, perceptions, methods of coping with
stress, and style of interaction? What did you learn about the other party or parties?

If you had the chance to do this negotiation over, what would you do differently?
3
My focus in grading will be on the quality of insight and reflective thinking embodied in the
journal entries. I also expect correct grammar and spelling. Use concepts and theories from the
readings or lectures when appropriate to analyze what happened in your negotiation.
I will separately distribute two very good journal entries from previous semesters. These
samples should give you a better idea of what I want in your journals.
The journal will be a very personal document. In order to gain full value from the writing, it is
important that you be honest with yourself. To facilitate this, I will keep your journal writing
confidential. In my comments, I may ask if you would be willing to share a particular set of
reflections with the class, but this will be strictly voluntary.
I recommend saving each entry as a separate computer file (e.g. Polynesian.docx or
Disarmament.docx). I also recommend printing out a paper copy of each journal entry as soon as
you finish writing it. That way, you will not lose your previous work if you make some grievous
computer error as you are writing a subsequent entry.
I urge you to write each journal entry soon after the exercise concludes, while you still
remember what happened.
Each journal entry for a role-playing exercise from class should begin with the following
information:
--name of the exercise
--your role in the exercise (for exercises with assigned roles, e.g., “buyer” for The Used
Car)
--name of your teammate or teammates, if any
--names of the persons with whom you (and your teammates, if any) negotiated
--roles of the persons with whom you negotiated
Example of information at the beginning of a journal entry:
Twin Lakes Mining Company
Town council: Bob, Jane, Dave Harris, Mary, and me
Mining company: Ellen, Joe, Dave Manski, Susan, and Vikram
(Note that last names are needed when there are two students in the class with the same first
name.)
The journal will be due in three parts. Part 1 covers the exercises through January 25. Part 2
covers the exercises from February 1-20. Part 3 covers the exercises from February 29 through
April 2.
4
REFLECTIONS PAPER
This is a short paper (about 5 pages, typed double spaced), reflecting back on your experiences
during the semester and identifying the key themes and lessons that have emerged. This
reflections paper should be based on three sources of data:
(a) Your journal. Examine your entire journal for the semester as though you were a
dispassionate social scientist who has just come across this curious document. Try to
codify the material in your journal, using specific examples from the journal to illustrate
general tendencies.
(b) Your self-assessment responses. On Monday in the second week of class, you will
complete a negotiation self-assessment. Save your response. Then, in mid-April,
complete this self-assessment again, without looking at the answers that you gave in
January. After you have written down your April answers, compare your April answers
to your January answers. Did your answers change? If so, why?
(c) Feedback from your classmates with whom you negotiated. I encourage, but do not
require, you to provide feedback to your classmates with whom you negotiate in class. I
will set aside class time at least twice during the semester for you to provide written
anonymous comments to your classmates, with the hope that this feedback will help your
classmates improve their negotiation skills. You should also feel free to provide your
classmates with oral comments on an ongoing basis or to give them written copies of
journal entries concerning your negotiations with them. Identify specific behaviors by
your fellow students, and tell them how their behaviors influenced your behaviors or your
feelings. If you are the recipient of such feedback, try to listen to it graciously and accept
it in the constructive spirit in which it was, I hope, intended.
CLASS ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION
Because of the highly experiential nature of the course, near perfect attendance is required for the
class sessions on which we have role playing exercises. Each student may miss one role-playing
exercise without penalty. Save this for the day that you get the flu, that you have to attend your
grandmother's funeral, or that you have a crucial job interview in Detroit. Students who miss
more than one role-playing exercise will have their grades reduced by 1/3 grade (e.g., from a 3.7
to a 3.3) for each exercise beyond the first that they miss. You have been warned.
If possible, please give me advance notice that you will be absent for a role-playing exercise; this
notice will help me when I organize the exercise at the beginning of the class.
It is sometimes possible to make arrangements for students to make up a missed exercise outside
of class, doing the exercise with another student who also had to miss class that day. It is
impossible, however, to make up exercises in which the whole class is one group (e.g., Bennett,
Strang & Farris). Finally, even when it is possible to make up a missed exercise outside of class,
you will learn less because you will miss much of the analysis from the debriefing. Both to
avoid the possibility of a grade penalty and to maximize your learning, you should make every
effort to attend all of the role-playing sessions.
5
After any adjustment is made on the basis of attendance, I will retain the option of a further
(subjective) adjustment on the basis of the quality of participation. Students who are poorly
prepared for a role playing exercise, who do not take their roles seriously, or who are not actively
involved in the exercise may diminish the potential learning from that exercise not only for
themselves, but also for the other person or persons in their group. (Fortunately, I have had few
such students in my negotiation course in past years.) On the other hand, students with
particularly keen insights may make the exercises more valuable both for themselves and for the
others in their group. The subjective adjustment can be as much as 1/3 of a grade either up or
down (e.g., the difference between a 3.3 and a 3.7.) In a large majority of cases, I will make no
subjective grade adjustment.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
Albion College has adopted the following statement on academic integrity: “As an academic
community, Albion College is firmly committed to honor and integrity in the pursuit of
knowledge. Therefore, as a member of this academic community, each student acknowledges
responsibility for his or her actions and commits to the highest standards of integrity. In doing
so, each student makes a covenant with the college not to engage in any form of academic
dishonesty, fraud, cheating, or theft.”
As noted above, you may not consult other students in this class or anyone else about the takehome exam. Furthermore, I expect you to refrain from making any effort to see the confidential
role-play instructions of students playing other roles in the negotiation exercises.
I leave it to each of you to decide whether to lie to another student with whom you are
negotiating, but you should consider very seriously both your personal ethics and the potential
damage to your ability to win the trust of others in the future.
DISABILITY STATEMENT
If you have a disability and may require accommodations or modifications in class instruction or
course-related activities, please contact the Learning Support Center (LSC) staff who can arrange
for reasonable accommodations for students who provide documentation of their
disability/condition. If you are presently registered with the LSC and have requested
accommodations through the LSC for this semester, please plan to meet with me as early as
possible to discuss the best way to implement these accommodations in this class. The LSC is
located on the third floor of the Seeley Mudd library or call 517-629-0825.
6
Tentative Schedule
Week of Day
Topic and Reading Assignment
Jan 16
Introduction
Role Play: “Polynesian Coconuts”
Wed
The ABC's of Game Theory and the Prisoner's Dilemma
Reading: text, chapter 1
Jan 23
Jan 30
Mon
Competition and Cooperation
Role Play: “The Disarmament Exercise”
Reading: Avinash Dixit and Barry Nalebuff, Thinking Strategically (New
York: W.W. Norton, 1991), “Ten Tales of Strategy,” pages 7-30.
Wed
Multiparty Prisoner’s Dilemma
Role Play: “Win As Much As You Can”
Readings:
Text, chapter 11
“Game Theory in Practice,” The Economist, September 3, 2011,
Technology Quarterly, pp. 13-14.
Mon
Distributive Bargaining, BATNA’s and Reservation Points
Reading: text, chapters 2-3
Theories of Negotiation
Readings:
Richard Walton and Robert McKersie, A Behavioral Theory of Labor
Negotiations (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965), “Introduction and
Theoretical Framework,” pages 1-10.
Howard Raiffa, The Art and Science of Negotiation (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1982), “Prologue,” “Some Organizing
Questions,” and “Research Perspectives,” pages 1-25.
H. Peyton Young, “Dividing the Indivisible,” in Richard Zeckhauser, et al.
(eds.), Wise Choices: Decisions, Games, and Negotiations (Boston:
Harvard Business School Press, 1996).
James Sebenius, “Sequencing to Build Coalitions: With Whom Should I
Talk First?” in Zeckhauser, Wise Choices.
Wed
Distributive Bargaining
Reading: text, appendix 4
Role Play: “Summer Internship”
Second Role Play: “The Used Car”
Journal part 1 due in class Wednesday, February 1
7
Week of Day
Topic and Reading Assignment
Feb 6
Mon
Greg Saltzman Buys a Minivan
Wed
Integrative Bargaining, Pareto Efficiency, and Negotiation Style
Role Play: “El Tek”
Reading: text, chapters 4-5
Mon
Trust, Ethics, and Power
Reading: text, chapters 6-7, Appendix 2
Feb 13
A Brief Introduction to Expected Value Calculations (needed for Jessie
Jumpshot role play next week)
Reading: Greg Saltzman, “Expected Value Calculations and the Jesse
Jumpshot Exercise”
Feb 20
Wed
Unequal Power
Role Play: “Viking Investments”
Readings:
Robert Mnookin, Scott Peppet, and Andrew Tulumello, “The Tension
between Empathy and Assertiveness,” Negotiation Journal, Vol. 12,
No. 3, July 1996, pp. 217-230.
Natalie Angier, “Thirst for Fairness May Have Helped Us Survive,” The
New York Times, July 5, 2011, p. B2.
Mon
(1) Use of Agents; (2) Contingent Contracts
Role Play: “Jessie Jumpshot”
Note: At the end of Monday’s class, you will be given some questions about
the Jessie Jumpshot negotiation to analyze prior to Wednesday’s class.
Wed
Discussion of Jessie Jumpshot questions; discussion of Jessie Jumpshot video
Cognitive Biases
Readings:
Text, chapter 8
Nassim Taleb, “Scaring Us Senseless,” The New York Times, July 24,
2005, Section 4, p. 13.
8
Week of Day
Topic and Reading Assignment
Feb 27
Mon
Gender Issues in Negotiations
Readings:
Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Men and Women of the Corporation (New York:
Basic Books, 1977), “Numbers: Minorities and Majorities,” pages
206-242.
Leonard Greenhalgh and Roderick Gilkey, “Our Game, Your Rules:
Developing Effective Negotiation Approaches,” in Linda Moore, ed.,
Not as Far as You Think (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1986).
Deborah Tannen, “The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why,”
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73, September-October 1995, pp. 138148.
Journal part 2 due in class Monday, February 27
Wed
Environmental Disputes
Role Play: “Twin Lakes Mining Company”
Mar 5
Mar 12
Mar 19
Mar 26
Apr 2
No classes (spring break)
Mon
Multiple Party Negotiations
Role Play: “Towers Market”
Reading: text, chapter 9
Wed
Structured Multi-Party Negotiations
Role Play: “Harborco”
Mon
Unstructured Multi-Party Negotiations
Role Play: “Flooding”
Reading (not specifically related to today’s role-play exercise): Leonard
Greenhalgh, “Managing Conflict,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 27,
No. 4, Summer 1986, pp. 45-51.
Wed
Unstructured Multi-Party Negotiations
Role Play: “Bennett, Strang & Farris”
Mon
Mediation and Arbitration
Reading: text, Appendix 3
Wed
Competition and Cooperation in Groups
Role Play: “Strategic Decisions at Jaguar”
Mon
Community Conflict: Race and Class Divisions
Role Play: “Elmwood Hospital Dispute”
Wed
Labor-Management Negotiations
Video: “Final Offer”
Journal part 3 due in class, Wednesday, April 4
9
10
Week of Day
Topic and Reading Assignment
Apr 9
Mon
Labor Negotiations
Role Play: “Happy Valley Consolidated School District”
Wed
Cross-Cultural Issues in International Negotiations
Role Play: “Alpha-Beta”
Readings:
Text, chapter 10
Hannah Seligson, “For American Workers in China, A Culture Clash,”
The New York Times, Dec. 24, 2009, pp. B1 and B2.
Mon
Decision Analysis in an International Business Negotiation
Role Play: “Cementownia Odra”
Wed
Vive la France
Role Play: “Mouse”
Mon
International Negotiation: The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict
Readings:
Ghassan Khatib, “The Fateh-Hamas Reconciliation Process and the
Conflict: Israel Plays a Role,” BitterLemons.org, January 16, 2012.
Scott Atran and Robert Axelrod, “Reframing Sacred Values,” Negotiation
Journal, Vol. 24, No. 3, July 2008, pp. 221-246.
Daniel Levy, David Makovsky, and Gideon Lichtfield, “Middle East
peace: Statements,” The Economist, posted online October 17, 2011.
Apr 16
Apr 23
Reflections essay due in class, Monday, April 23
Wed
International Negotiation: The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict