Loyola Marymount University, College of Business Administration
MBAB/E 698: Negotiations, Fall, 2006
Mondays, August 28-December 11, 2006; 7:15-10:00pm, Hilton 103
E-mail: suepad@earthlink.net or spad@lmu.edu
Professor Sue Padernacht, M.A.
Phone: 714.960.0616-office or 714.615.1767-cell Fax: (888) 702-8683
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this course is to provide you, the MBA student and business professional, the theories,
processes and tools to improve your abilities and confidence as a negotiator. Because you and most everyone
you work with negotiate formally and informally, this course has been designed to address a broad spectrum
of challenges faced by managers and professionals in a variety of business settings.
The art and science of negotiation rests on a combination of analytical and interpersonal skills and knowledge.
This course relies heavily on sound theoretical study as well as opportunities to put theory into practice. The
analytical focus will enable you to be more reflective, better prepared and more capable of developing
strategies based on a deeper understanding of the context and dynamics of negotiations. The interpersonal
focus will explore negotiation styles, uses of power and the communication and interpersonal approaches that
can account for so much of the deal making and breaking in the negotiation process.
A central element of this course will be learning via hands-on experience, and most classes will have
significant time allotted to interactive negotiation exercises and activities. These exercises and activities,
covering a broad range of substantive issues, will illustrate major points in the readings as well as motivate
further discussion and reflection. Through them, you will have an opportunity to experiment with a variety of
negotiation strategies and tactics.
COURSE MATERIALS
Textbooks:
th
• Negotiation, 5 edition, Roy J. Lewicki, David M. Saunders, Bruce Barry, 2006
• Difficult Conversations, Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen, 1999
• Getting Past No, William Ury, 1993
Course Reader:
• Additional reading assignments including published articles and chapter readings will comprise the
course reader.
Case Simulations and Supportive Materials:
• In-class learning activities will often consist of case simulations; these will include instructions and
assigned roles that will be distributed in class. A Negotiation Prep Sheet will be required for each, which
will be available on Blackboard-Course Documents. A Supplementary Resource to the Prep Sheet,
Simulation Reflection Sheet and Simulation Debrief Guidelines are also provided on Blackboard-Course
Documents.
Power Point Lecture Notes:
• Power Point slides for each class will be posted on Blackboard-Course Materials prior to each class.
Please bring a copy to class for easy note-taking; handouts of the slides will not be provided in class. The
slides presented in class, complete with answers and insights into class activities, will be available on
Blackboard-Course Materials following each class session.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS
CLASS PARTICIPATION: (40% of grade, combined)
1. Case Simulations: These are negotiation role-play exercises that are designed specifically for
graduate level negotiation courses. The success of all in-class activities depends on each class
member’s active involvement. Class participation will be evaluated based on:
− Pre-class Preparation-Negotiation Prep Sheets (30% of the class grade)
− In-class Involvement-Negotiation Case Simulations (10% of the class grade)
Pre-class Preparation: You will be provided the instructions and assigned roles for each case
simulation according to the course schedule at the end of this syllabus. If you miss a class during
which a case simulation is distributed, you will be able to retrieve a copy from Ann Marie Nuno in the
MBA office, 310-338-7561. A “Negotiation Prep Sheet” (“prep sheet”) has been posted on
Blackboard-Course Documents, which you will use to analyze the specifics of the cases and prepare
to carry out your assigned roles.
In many cases, you will prepare a prep sheet before class and turn in a copy at the beginning of the
session (or email before class). During these classes, you will also need a copy of your prep sheet to
use during the in-class simulations. During other sessions, the cases will be provided in class, and you
will be required to bring a blank prep sheet to class. Please see page 8 of this syllabus for a
breakdown of the grading for the prep sheets, and the course schedule at the end of this syllabus for a
breakdown of the prep sheet assignments by date.
In-class Involvement: The ground rules for active in-class involvement apply to the negotiation case
simulations, class discussions and other class activities. These include:
− Experiment! You will not be graded on the substantive outcome of the negotiation exercises.
While you will have significant influence over your own outcome, part of your success will be a
function of your assigned role and your negotiating partner(s). Hence, you are encouraged to
experiment with different negotiation styles and tactics. Your MBA program is a low-risk, safe
environment to challenge your emotions and wits during these activities, and this will help you to
become a more effective negotiator.
− Confidentiality! To foster an open and trusting learning environment, please treat the
information and insights shared by others in the class as confidential. You can rely on me to do
the same both in class and with all of your assignments.
− Experience Variety! You will be assigned different roles for different case simulations
throughout the course. If you find yourself repeating partnerships with friends or people with
similar styles and approaches, ask to switch to ensure a richer learning experience.
− Win an Oscar! Well no not really, but empathize with your role in order to represent this
person during the exercise. Taking your role seriously, staying in role throughout the simulation
and seeing the world through the eyes of your role is essential to learning from this experience.
Within your role, experiment with a variety of styles, approaches and tactics. If your partner(s)
come(s) out of role, ignore that interruption and remain in role.
− No Case Research Required! Since the facts of the cases are drawn from real situations, there
is no need to conduct additional research. All the information needed is provided in the cases, but
you may improvise and represent the facts as you wish within your role.
− Share Your Thoughts! This course is intended to be participative and needs your ideas,
questions and insights to be part of class discussions. We all learn from each other, and your
contributions will benefit everyone.
− Keep Role Instructions Private! Since many of the negotiation exercises include confidential
instructions for your assigned role, do not show these instructions to other class members.
Exchanging this information will not assist you or others in improving your negotiation
effectiveness and will only defeat the purpose of these exercises.
− Watch the Time! Some of the cases will take longer than you need them to; others will end
before you want them to. The course is constrained by time and taking an extra few (or more)
minutes cuts into the class’s opportunity to learn from the exercise. It may also result in the class
ending later than planned.
− Do Not Disturb! If you and your partner(s) complete the activity before others in class, remain
quiet so that your outcome does not influence them and disrupt their learning experience. Either
reflect on your own experience and make detailed notes about the exercise, or debrief with your
partner(s) out of earshot of those who are not yet finished.
2. One-on-One Meeting: For the session of week 9, I will meet with each of you individually to review
the bulleted items below:
• Your progress and questions about the course
• Your EQ-i results
• Your strengths and improvement needs as a negotiator
• You may also discuss and/or practice a current negotiation you are involved in
A Sign-up Sheet will be provided in class for October 23, 24 or 30 (also referenced in
Blackboard-Forums). Your final selection will be due by week 4.
3. Assessments: You will be required to complete three assessments, the results of which will not be
counted toward any part of your grade. You will use your assessment results to participate in and gain
insights from in-class learning activities during the sessions of weeks 8, 9 and 12. Refraining from
participating in any of these assessments will automatically result in a full letter grade deduction off your
class participation grade (e.g., A to B, B+ to C+). The assessments are:
• Online Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and Emotional Intelligence Quotient (EQ-i), both due
by week 7. The websites and login information are provided on Blackboard- Course Documents.
You are required to take these assessments even if you have taken them before. You will receive a
confidential, personalized MBTI report during the session of week 8, and a confidential, personalized
EQ-i report during our one-on-one meeting (week 9).
• Dealing with Tough Negotiators due by week 11. This self-administered paper assessment will be
provided and explained during our one-one-one meeting (week 9). Your results are due by email by
the start of session 11. Please bring the assessment to the session of week 12.
4. Attendance: Because each session will include in-class learning activities, absences will result in
inconvenience and a loss of learning opportunity for you and others in class. Your attendance in each class
is mandatory because your presence is so important, however, if you will not be able to attend a session,
let me know as soon as possible so we can plan accordingly. An absence will be considered excused if you
notify me before the start of class, or in case of emergency, within 48 hours after class. An unexcused
absence will result in a full letter grade deduction off your class participation grade (e.g., A to B, B+ to
C+).
5. Tardiness: Please plan to arrive to class on time. Arriving late to class will be disruptive due to the
participative nature of the sessions. All classes will begin promptly at 7:15pm.
6. No Electronics: Because laptops, PDAs and cell phones invite distractions (other work, instant
messaging, text messaging, email, internet), these tools will not be allowed to be used and/or “ring” during
class. Cell phones may “vibrate,” as long as the sound is not loud or distracting.
PAPERS: (45% of grade, combined)
1. Introductory Paper: (5% of grade) One way for me to get to know you is through your experiences,
preconceptions and reflections on negotiation. This 3-page paper will include:
• An explanation of why you are taking this class by describing your learning goals to become a more
effective negotiator.
• A description of your experiences in work-related negotiations, including the most challenging
negotiation you have experienced in the previous year, and your reflections about how you performed
in that negotiation.
• Your reflections on your biases and misconceptions about negotiating based on what you have
learned so far. Describe how those biases and misconceptions have manifested themselves in your
most challenging negotiation experience.
• Blackboard: Provide a paragraph description of yourself from this paper into Blackboard-Forums
to let others in the class know the following: name, organization, job title, basic responsibilities, how
you currently negotiate or anticipate negotiating in your job/career.
2. Case Simulation and Analysis: (20% of grade) Using a case called The Consultant, you and a partner
will each write your own prep sheets, and together write a 5-page paper reporting on and analyzing your
simulation experiences, including recommendations for negotiation based on your reflections and
discussions. You may select your partner or request that one be selected for you.
Simulation Requirements:
• You and your partner will role play this case to make a last attempt to save the deal. You are
encouraged to audiotape yourselves for later reference when discussing your experiences and writing
the paper. You will not be required to turn in the recording as part of this assignment.
• Because the facts of the case are sketchy – and because some solutions will require confirming data
or consulting with people not at the table – you may come to a contingent agreement for the purpose
of writing this paper. An important point going into this negotiation is that to break the deadlock, this
situation requires an integrative approach. Splitting the difference will not yield a satisfactory result
for either of you. At the same time, you both are required to get the best possible deal for your
respective organizations.
• Once you have completed role playing, discuss the simulation. This discussion will provide rich
reflections and insights about the negotiation, which you will include in your paper. Use the paper
requirements below to guide this discussion.
Paper Requirements:
• Negotiation plan. Complete and include a prep sheet for each role. Explain how each role
prepared for the negotiation as well as each role’s perspective what did and did not go according to
plan. Describe any surprises each role experienced.
• Negotiation process. How did the negotiation begin and progress? What did each role learn about
the situation and about each other? How much disclosure was there? What interpersonal issues were at
play? What strategies were being employed?
• Negotiation outcome. How successful was the negotiation in the opinion of both roles? How did it
end? Were there any agreements? How do each of you feel about the relationship and the
interpersonal skills used during the negotiation?
• Negotiation recommendations. Based on your discussions and reflections, what went well and what
didn’t go well in this negotiation? What could each of you have done differently to improve the
process and the outcome? If you could start over, what would you recommend for a successful
negotiation? Describe and explain your recommendations.
3. Negotiation Project Paper: (20% of grade) The purpose of this paper is to provide an opportunity for
you to apply what you’ve learned in class to the real world of negotiation. You have two choices, Option
A or Option B and your selection should be based on which would be a better learning experience for you.
For either choice, you do not need to use the negotiations described in your Introductory Paper, however
you are free to do so.
Seven sections of questions have been provided for both options to help you organize your paper and
provide a guideline for your analysis and responses to each section. Complete and include a Prep Sheet
for this paper. While you may not be able to answer all of the questions within each section, you may
reflect upon many of them in the paper as part of your lessons learned about negotiating. You are
encouraged to add other observations and insights that may not be included in these questions as well as
skip any questions that may not be relevant, e.g., multi-party questions, contract considerations, protocols,
legal requirements.
Option A: Past Negotiation Reflection This paper will provide an opportunity for you to reconsider a
work-related negotiation you experienced in the recent past, which should be no more than two years ago.
As you answer the questions below, indicate what you did, thought and felt, as well as what you would do
differently in hindsight. You should site at least five references to the readings and literature from this
semester.
1. Describe the situation. What was the context of the negotiation? Provide relevant background
information. Who was involved and what were the relationships? What was the impetus for a
negotiation? What issues were on the table?
2. Analyze your negotiation planning. How did you plan for the negotiation? What was your plan and
what were your goals? What research did you conduct? What were your assumptions, positions,
interests, target and reservation points and BATNA? What did you know about the other negotiator’s
reputation, assumptions, positions, interests, target, reservation point and BATNA? What was your
plan and what strategies did you use? What negotiation misconceptions did you have going into the
negotiation?
3. Analyze the distributive dimensions of the negotiation. What did you know about the bargaining
zone? Who was more dependent on coming to a resolution? Who had a better BATNA? Who made
the opening offer, what was it, and to what degree did it anchor the rest of the negotiation? What
patterns of concessions took place during the negotiation? What tactics were used in the final offer,
commitment and closing phases of the negotiation?
4. Analyze the integrative dimensions of the negotiation. To what degree was the negotiation more
integrative and interest-based than distributive and position-based? What characteristics of the
negotiation and the negotiators’ behavior made that so? What were your common and opposing goals,
issues and stakes? How were those resolved? Which option-generation, criteria development and
problem-solving methodologies were used? What alternative solutions were developed? What
trade-offs were made and how was the solution(s) selected?
5. Analyze negotiation styles, uses of power, individual and social factors. What negotiation styles did
you and the other negotiator use? Did either of you adjust your style during the negotiation? If so,
what was the shift and what were the impetus and motivation for that shift? What impact did your
styles have on the outcome of the negotiation? Were either of you a “tough negotiator?” In what way?
How would a different style have made a difference in that outcome? How was power used to
influence the outcome? To what degree did you and the other negotiator use any of the “breakthrough
strategies” described by Ury in his book Getting Past No? To what degree did you leverage your
emotional intelligence and MBTI preference strengths, in which areas did you stretch, and in which
areas were you particularly challenged?
6. Determine whether there were any ethical issues. Where any tactics used that you would consider
unethical? What were those tactics and what made them cross the line from “tough” to unethical?
How was the unethical behavior handled? What were the consequences of the unethical behavior?
7. Conclude with the major lessons learned. What insights have you gained from this analysis about
yourself as a negotiator and about negotiation theories and practices? What negotiation strengths will
you build on and development needs will you improve? What will you commit to do to be a more
effective negotiator?
Option B: Recent Negotiation Experience This paper is an analysis of a current negotiation you will
plan and conduct sometime during the semester. You will need to complete this negotiation by the due
date of this paper for this option to be a viable one for you. There will be a greater emphasis in this paper
on your negotiation planning compared to Option A; in fact, as you answer the questions below, compare
and contrast your plans and anticipated approaches, tactics, thoughts and feelings with the actual
negotiation. You should site at least five references to the readings and literature from this semester.
1. Describe the situation. What is the context of the negotiation? Provide relevant background
information. Who is involved and what are the relationships? What is the impetus for a negotiation?
What issues are on the table?
2. Develop a negotiation plan. What are your goals? What research do you need to conduct? What are
your assumptions, positions, interests, target and reservation points and BATNA? What do you know
about the other negotiator’s reputation, assumptions, positions, interests, target, reservation point and
BATNA? What is your plan and what strategies will you use? What would happen if no resolution is
reached? How would that impact you and the other negotiator? What negotiation misconceptions do
you need to discard to be successful? How will you manage your negotiation strengths and
challenges? After the negotiation is complete: Compare and contrast your plans with the actual
negotiation.
3. Determine the distributive dimensions of the negotiation. What do you know about the bargaining
zone? Who is more dependent on coming to a resolution? Who has a better BATNA? Will you make
the opening offer, what is it, and to what degree do you want it to anchor the rest of the negotiation?
What patterns of concessions are you willing to employ during the negotiation? What tactics are you
willing to use in the final offer, commitment and closing phases of the negotiation? After the
negotiation is complete: Compare and contrast your plans with the actual negotiation.
4. Determine the integrative dimensions of the negotiation. To what degree can the negotiation be
more integrative and interest-based than distributive and position-based? In what ways will you role
model the characteristics of an integrative approach? What behaviors will you adopt? What are your
common and opposing goals, issues and stakes? How can those resolved? Which option-generation,
criteria development and problem-solving methodologies can be used? After the negotiation is
complete: What alternative solutions were developed, what trade-offs were made and how was one (or
more) solution selected? Compare and contrast your plans with the actual negotiation.
5. Analyze negotiation styles, uses of power, individual and social factors. What negotiation style will
you use? Can you anticipate situations in which you would adjust your style during the negotiation? If
so, what would they be and how might that impact the outcome of the negotiation? What style do you
anticipate the other negotiator using? If the other negotiator is “tough,” what strategies will you use to
deal with that style? How can you use power in a constructive way to influence the outcome? To what
degree will you and the other negotiator use any of the “breakthrough strategies” described by Ury in
his book Getting Past No? How will you leverage your MBTI preference strengths and in which areas
will you stretch? After the negotiation is complete: Compare and contrast your plans with the actual
negotiation.
6. Determine whether there could be any ethical issues. Based on the interests and stakes for both you
and the other negotiator, in what ways could there be any ethical breaches? How will you handle your
own ethical issues? How can you respond to unethical behavior by the other negotiator? After the
negotiation is complete: Compare and contrast your plans with the actual negotiation.
7. Conclude with the major lessons learned. What thematic insights have you gained from this
analysis about yourself as a negotiator and about negotiation theories and practices? What negotiation
strengths will you build on and development needs will you improve? What will you commit to do to
be a more effective negotiator?
Paper Requirements:
• Format requirements: well proofed, use of Microsoft Word, double-spaced, paginated (page numbers
in the header or footer), 1-inch margins, 12 pt. font, with headings.
• All papers are expected to be professionally written, using proper, standard English. The use of slang
popularized by the vernacular will result in points taken off the paper grade.
• My preference is to receive a hard copy of Paper #2, and emails of Papers #1 and #3. You may email
Paper #2 if you and your partner cannot attend class on the due date.
Late Papers and Prep Sheets:
Papers and prep sheets are due by 7:15pm according to the dates on the course schedule, except for prep
sheets developed in class. Each day late will be counted from that time on each due date.
• Papers/prep sheets submitted up to 1 to 3 days late will incur a 10% late penalty off the paper/prep
sheet grade.
• Papers/prep sheets submitted up to 4 to 7 days late will incur a 25% late penalty off the paper/prep
sheet grade.
• Papers/prep sheets submitted after 7 days late will not be accepted without prior arrangement.
COMPREHENSIVE TEAM EXAM: (15% of grade)
• There will be one in-class, closed book/closed notes cumulative exam which is scheduled on
December 11. The exam will be taken individually on Blackboard.
• You will take the exam by meeting in teams of 3-4, though each team member will complete and
submit his or her own answers to the exam questions on Blackboard. This process provides each team
member the advantage of the group’s collective brainpower, but also the flexibility to respond to the
exam questions individually.
• You may either select your own teammates or request to be assigned to a team. You are encouraged
to study together, but are strongly discouraged from assigning each other class topics to “specialize
in” – this not only defeats the purpose of your learning experience, but teams that study this way do
poorly on the exam because they don’t have the advantage of the collective brainpower of the team for
each topic.
• The exam will test your understanding of the concepts, strategies and techniques covered in class
materials, class discussions and reading assignments. You will not be tested on the content of any of
the negotiation exercises – you will be tested on the lessons learned from these exercises.
• The format of the exam will be multiple-choice and true-false. You are required to bring your own
laptop computer in order to take the exam. Instructions for taking the exam on Blackboard will be
provided the day of the exam.
GRADING
Grading of Negotiation Prep Sheets:
Completing prep sheets is a critical part of the learning process and reflects 30% of your grade. Either email or
submit a hard copy of your prep sheet by the scheduled due date, and bring a copy for yourself to use during
the in-class simulations. For each prep sheet that is not completed as detailed below, the number of points
assigned to the prep sheet will be deducted from your final grade (3 points will be deducted for Prep Sheet
#1). If you are unable to attend any of the sessions during which prep sheets are developed in class, we will
make alternative plans for you to make-up the assignment. Prep sheet evaluation criteria include:
1. Thoroughness and Accuracy
• Does the prep sheet show an in-depth analysis or one that is more cursory?
• Were concepts from the readings and in-class materials used?
• Were the various perspectives of the negotiation taken into consideration?
• Have all parts of the prep sheet been completed? Have they been completed accurately?
2. Thoughtfulness and Quality
• Were the concepts from the readings and in-class materials applied in a way that provided additional
insight about the situation and how to proceed more effectively?
•
How thoughtfully were the situation strengths and weaknesses analyzed? NAs and BATNA?
• How thoughtfully developed were the interests, positions, AT• What is the quality of the possible
proposals and first offers?
3. Tn
ured In On Time• ccording to the course schedule at the end of this syllabus.
A
Prep Sheet
Number
Case Name d Week Due
Value to
Grade
1
Assignment Required anSally Soprano Homework/self-graded in teams during
the session of week 3.
For
Practice
Only
2
Buying a House Homework submitted by the beginning of the session of week
4.
2%
3
Discount and Hawkins Homework submitted by the beginning of the session of
week 5.
3%
4
Sally Soprano (revisited) Homework submitted by the beginning of the session of
week 6.
3%
5
Where’s Alvin? A Case of Lost Ethics
4%
6
Homework submitted by the beginning of the session of week 10. “12 Angry
Men” Individual/Social Analysis (Developed during class in teams). Submitted
following the debrief during the session of week 11.
4%
7
Hans Brandt (Developed during class in teams) Submitted prior to debrief during
the session of week 12.
4%
8
The Best Stuff on Earth Homework submitted by the beginning of the session of
week 14.
5%
9
Guest Speaker’s Case (Developed during class in teams) Submitted prior to
debrief during the session of week 15.
5%
Grading Allocation:
Your final grade will be based upon your performance on the following:
= 40%
• Class Participation
- Negotiation Prep Sheets = 30 - In-class Involvement = 10%
= 5%
• Paper #1: Introductory Paper
= 20%
• Paper #2: Case Simulation and Analysis
= 20%
• Paper #3: Negotiation Project Paper
= 15%
• Comprehensive Team Exam
Grading Ranges:
Grades will be assigned based on your performance according to the following grade ranges:
A=
92% or above B- = 80 - 82.9%
A- = 89 - 91.9%
C = 75 - 79.9%
B+ = 85 - 88.9%
F=
B=
74.9% or below
83 - 84.9%
INSTRUCTOR’S PROFESSIONAL BIOGRAPHY
Professor Sue Padernacht, M.A. has been an expert in organization and leadership development for over 23
years. She specializes in change and performance management systems consulting, executive and
management coaching, emotional intelligence development, team facilitation, and leadership and negotiations
training. In her consulting practice, she works with private, public and non-profit organizations in a variety of
sectors, including health care, technology, financial services, engineering, utilities, publishing, hospitality,
media and entertainment. She is currently serving on the Regional Council of the American Cancer Society in
Los Angeles, where she has volunteered her teaching and consulting services for 10 years.
In her academic endeavors, Professor Padernacht is an Adjunct Professor in the MBA programs at Loyola
Marymount University-Los Angeles and University of California Irvine. She has been a conference presenter
and conducted certification programs at Georgetown University, Gallaudet University, UCLA, California
Polytechnic at Pomona, USC/ASTD Institute for Human Performance Technology and California State
Universities at Long Beach and Northridge. Professor Padernacht earned a Master of Arts from Columbia
University, Teachers College in Organizational Psychology, and a Bachelor of Arts from State University of
New York at Stony Brook in Psychology and The Social and Ethical Issues in the Life Sciences.
GUEST SPEAKER’S PROFESSIONAL BIOGRAPHY
Mr. Scott Jarus will join us to discuss a chief executive’s perspective on negotiation in the new millennia.
Mr. Jarus is the CEO of Cognition, a Los Angeles-based linguistic Search technology firm, utilizing the power
and precision of the next evolution in on-line Search capabilities. Until July 2005, Mr. Jarus was President
(chief executive) of j2 Global Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: JCOM), a provider of outsourced,
value-added messaging and communications services throughout the world. At the time, j2 Global served
more than 9.5 million customers with a local presence in more than 1,500 cities in 25 countries on 5
continents. The Company markets its patented services and software under the eFax®, j2®, jConnect®,
JFAX®, eFax Corporate®, Electric Mail®, Onebox®, ConsensusTM, eVoice®, jBlast®, M4 Internet,
Papermaster®, and other brands. j2 Global is based in Hollywood, CA. As of June 30, 2005 , Mr. Jarus' last
quarter with the company, j2 Global had achieved 33 consecutive quarters of revenue growth and 14
consecutive quarters of positive and growing earnings. Additional information on the Company can be found
at www.j2global.com .
Mr. Jarus has 22 years of management experience in the telecommunications industry, beginning with a
company that built one of the world's first public packet-data switching networks. He served as SVP of
Operations at RCN Telecom where he was responsible for directing the operations of RCN’s telephone, cable
TV and Internet networks, and the Company’s customer service, order administration and order provisioning
functions. He was a co-founder and VP of Multimedia Medical Systems, a provider of advanced multimedia
applications to the healthcare industry. Mr. Jarus was with Metromedia Communications for nine years in
various executive positions, ultimately serving as its VP of Operations. He also held senior management
positions at Metromedia in information systems, sales and security. Prior to joining j2 Global in 2001, Mr.
Jarus was the President and COO for OnSite Access, the premier building-centric Integrated Communications
Provider (voice, data, Internet and enhanced services) serving businesses in 22 markets throughout North
America. During his tenure, the company grew from a single market in the U.S. to 22 markets throughout
North America, and from 2 served buildings to over 600 fully-served buildings in less than three years. He
successfully raised more than $150MM in private equity & debt capital for the Company. Mr. Jarus was
named by Ernst & Young as the National Entrepreneur of the Year for Media/Entertainment/Communications
in 2005, and the Regional Entrepreneur of the Year for Technology (Los Angeles) in 2004. He holds a
Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology and a Master of Business Administration degree from the University of
Kansas.
COURSE SCHEDULE
DATE
TOPIC
READINGS DUE
ASSIGNMENTS DUE
Week
1
Aug.
28
Overview and
Introduction
Week
2
Sept. 4
No Class Session
Happy Labor Day!
Week
3
Sept.
11
Negotiation
Preparation and
Strategy
Textbooks: Negotiation, ch. 1, 4, 5; Getting Past Prep Sheet #1: Sally
No, pp. 3-28
Soprano (practice)
Week
4
Sept.
18
Distributive
Negotiations
Textbooks: Negotiation, ch. 2; Getting Past No,
pp. 31-129
Week
5
Integrative
Negotiations
Sept.
25
Paper #1: by email Sept. 1
Introductory Paper
Blackboard: Paragraph
from Paper #1
Course Reader: Harvard Business School: Wu,
Anchoring and First Offers in Negotiation
Prep Sheet #2: Buying a
House; bring a Simulation
Reflection Sheet
Sign-Up:
Select a day and time for
session 9
Textbook: Negotiation, ch. 3, 6; Getting Past No, Prep
pp. Sheet #3: Discount
130-171
and Hawkins; bring a
Simulation Reflection Sheet
Week
6
Oct. 2
Negotiating
Compensation
Week
7
Oct. 9
Independent
Study: No Class
Session
Course Reader: Get Paid What You’re Worth:
Pinkley & Northcraft, ch. 3-6; The Mind and
Heart of the Negotiator: Thompson, Appendix
4- Negotiating a Job Offer
Negotiating
Consulting Fees
Week
8
Oct.
16
Textbook: Difficult Conversations, Introduction
and ch. 1
Individual
Differences in
Negotiations
Textbooks: Difficult Conversations, ch. 2-5
Course Reader: Value-Based Fees: Weiss, ch. 1,
3 4; Negotiating Rationally: Bazerman and
Neale, ch. 12
Textbooks: Negotiation, ch. 15; Difficult
Conversations, ch. 6-9
Prep Sheet #4: Sally
Soprano; bring a Simulation
Reflection Sheet
Conduct The Consultant
case simulation and write
paper #2
Online MBTI and EQ-i
See instructions posted on
Blackboard. Due by
scheduled class time
Paper #2: The Consultant
Course Reader: Working with Emotional
Intelligence: Goleman, ch. 8; Beyond Reason:
Fisher and Shapiro, Introduction – p. 21; I’m
Not Crazy, I’m Just Not You: Pearman &
Albritton, ch. 1; Women Don’t Ask: Babcock
and Laschever, Introduction and ch. 1
COURSE SCHEDULE
DATE
TOPIC
Week
9
One-on-One
Meetings: No
Class Session
Oct.
23
Week
10
Oct.
30
Week
11
Nov. 6
READINGS DUE
ASSIGNMENTS DUE
To be scheduled in class;
includes receiving EQ-i
feedback. Dealing with Tough
Negotiators assessment to be
distributed
Prep Sheet #5: Where’s Alvin?
A Case of Lost Ethics; bring a
Simulation Reflection Sheet
Power, Influence
and Ethics in
Negotiations
Textbook: Negotiation, ch. 7, 8, 9
Social Factors in
Negotiation
Textbook: Negotiation, ch. 10, 14;
Difficult Conversations, ch. 10-12, Road
Map and Note
Prep Sheet #6: 12 Angry Men
Individual/ Social Analysis;
Analysis tool provided in class
Course Reader: Harvard Business School:
Wheeler, Nonverbal Communication in
Negotiation
Email your results to Dealing
with Tough Negotiators
Course Reader: What’s Fair? Ethics in
Negotiation: Menkel-Meadow &
Wheeler, Introduction and ch. 6;
Negotiation vol. 9 no. 7: Galinsky and
Magee, Power Plays
Week
12
Difficult
Negotiations
Nov.
13
Week
13
Textbook: Negotiation, ch. 17, 18
Course Reader: Negotiation Journal:
Gray, Negotiating with Your Nemesis;
Negotiation vol. 9 no. 1: Malhotra, The
Fine Art of Making Concessions;
Negotiation vol. 9 no. 3: Bonnet and
Meier, How Much Should You Trust
No Class
Happy Thanksgiving!
Multi-Party
Negotiations
Textbooks: Negotiation, ch. 11, 12, 13
Best Practices in
Negotiation
Guest Speaker: Scott Jarus (see page 10
of this syllabus to review the Professional
Biography)
Self-Scored Assessment: Bring
to class - Dealing with Tough
Negotiators
Prep Sheet #7: Hans Brandt
Bring a blank Prep Sheet to
class. Prep Sheet to be
developed in teams and
submitted during class
Nov.
20
Week
14
Nov.
27
Week
15
Dec. 4
Course Reader: Negotiating Rationally:
Bazerman and Neale, ch. 14
Textbook: Negotiation, ch. 20
Week
16
Dec.
11
Comprehensive
Team Exam
Prep Sheet #8: The Best Stuff
on Earth; bring a Simulation
Reflection Sheet
Prep Sheet #9: Guest Speaker’s
Case Bring a blank Prep Sheet
to class. Prep Sheet to be
developed in teams and
submitted during class
Paper #3: Negotiation Project
Paper