MOR 569 – Negotiation and Deal-Making
16701, Popovich 104, Tuesday 2:00 – 4:50PM
16703, Popovich 110, Tuesday 6:30 – 9:30PM
Fall 2013
Terance J. Wolfe, Ph.D.
Email:
Office:
Phone:
FAX:
Office Hours:
Terance.Wolfe@marshall.usc.edu
Bridge 307-F
213.740.0765
213.740.3582
by appt
Course Overview
Negotiation is the art and science of securing agreements between two or more parties seeking
to maximize their individual and/or joint outcomes. The central issues in this course deal with
understanding the behavior of individuals, groups, and/or organizational representatives in the
context of ambiguous situations that pose the potential for negotiated solutions.
The purpose of the course is to understand the theory and practice of negotiation as they are
applied in a variety of settings. The course is relevant to a broad spectrum of negotiation
problems faced by managers and professionals. The content is appropriate for those interested
in a wide variety of topics including marketing, real estate, entrepreneurship, consulting, project
management, M&A, joint ventures, and cross-cultural/cross-border transactions, among others.
The course emphasizes negotiations that occur in the daily life of managers.
A basic premise of the course is that managers need analytic skills to discover optimal solutions
to problems, and negotiation skills to get solutions accepted and implemented. The course
allows participants to develop their skills experientially and to understand negotiation through
useful analytical frameworks. Emphasis is placed on simulations, role-playing, and cases.
Objectives. The purpose of this course is to develop a conceptual and a practical approach to
negotiation and dispute resolution. The major objectives for participants are to:

Gain a broad intellectual familiarity of a set of central concepts that will enable the
systematic understanding and evaluation of the process of negotiation.

Improve analytical abilities in understanding our own style, needs, concerns, desires,
motivations, and outcome preferences, as well as those of counterpart negotiators.

Increase confidence in our ability to persuade and negotiate both within and across
cultures.

Understand the negotiation process as an effective means for resolving conflict.

Provide experience in negotiation including how to (1) clarify one’s own outcome
preferences as well as those of others, (2) understand and adapt (as needed) one’s own
style, (3) evaluate the costs and benefits of alternative actions, and (4) manage the
negotiation process.
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 1 of 12
Course Format
The course is designed around a series of negotiation exercises. In a given class session, you
can expect any combination of lecture, class discussion, class negotiation activities (to include
an actual negotiation and debrief of the experience), and/or video.
All negotiation exercises require advance preparation and active participation. You must (1) be
fully prepared for these exercises prior to class, and (2) actively participate in negotiation
simulations and post-simulation debriefs.
Some class time may be provided when group preparation is required. However, expect to
meet face-to-face or virtually outside of class to prepare for some negotiation activities.
Keys to Exercise Success
There are four keys to getting the most out of the negotiation exercises in this course:
 Do the readings. Grasp the key concepts of negotiation and conflict management.
Apply course concepts in your preparation for, and participation in, each case. This will
enhance your learning and negotiation effectiveness.
 Prepare thoroughly. Read the cases carefully and prepare thoroughly for your role in the
negotiation. Preparation will rapidly enhance your negotiation skills and competencies,
and contribute to the development of these competencies in your classmates.
 Design personal learning experiments. Think about your own style and your negotiation
effectiveness. Design “experiments” to modify your style to enhance your effectiveness.
 Reflect on your negotiating experiences. Draw upon course concepts and principles to
explain what happened and how those are likely to apply (or not) in future negotiations.
Achieving the objectives comes only with disciplined preparation and application of the course
concepts. Do not expect to improve your negotiation effectiveness through minimal preparation.
The bulk of the work is devoted to preparing for, conducting, and debriefing negotiations.
Course Materials
Texts (required):
Lewicki, Saunders & Barry. 2011. Essentials of Negotiation, 5th edition. McGraw-Hill.
Exams will be based upon the 5th ed. Use earlier editions at own risk.
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In.
New York: Penguin Books.
Reader (required): You’ll buy this at the bookstore and get very little that is tangible for your
money. The cost of the reader covers licensing fees for all the negotiation exercises that
will be distributed in class. You must provide me with the voucher that attests to your
purchase of the course reader no later than Tuesday, Sept 10. Bring to class your own
copy of the general information for each exercise – this information is included in the
reader.
Use your pre-class study time to focus on preparing for, and reflecting on, simulations. Before
each session, (1) do the readings, (2) look for what you can use in the upcoming exercise, (3)
complete a “prep” sheet (see Blackboard), (4) design personal learning experiments to improve
your negotiation effectiveness, and (5) be prepared to experiment, have fun, learn!
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 2 of 12
Summary of Course Requirements
Scores and grades for this course are assigned based on completion of the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Session preparation
Mid-term Exam
Personal Assessment
Group Project
TOTAL
30%
20%
20%
30%
100%
Details are described below; due dates are summarized in the Schedule of Sessions .
Course Assignments and Grading
1. Session Preparation (30%) – PLEASE READ CAREFULLY.
This is for preparation and execution of the exercises, and contribution to debriefing
discussions. Being here AND being prepared is key. Preparation involves completing
the assigned readings and preparing the negotiation exercise. Since I try to observe as
many negotiations as possible, it is often quite obvious when a student is not prepared.
Evidence of a lack of preparation includes reading or constantly referring back to the
simulation materials during the actual negotiation. This harms your negotiation partner’s
experience as well as your own, will be noted by me, and taken into account in the final
assignment of preparation scores.
We will utilize the ELC during the semester. Negotiation sessions utilizing the ELC are
highlighted in gray on the schedule of sessions below. All ELC sessions will be
videotaped. Videotapes should be reviewed to understand and critique your negotiation
style and learning experiments (see below for a description of learning experiments),
and videotapes should be referenced in your personal assessment assignment.
When negotiating, you must follow all the instructions that are provided for your role.
However, you do have freedom to be creative in how you interpret this information
and the kinds of strategies you employ, provided that they do not contradict any of
the explicit instructions or fundamentally alter the negotiation’s structure.
When negotiating, the following behaviors are regarded as inappropriate: reading negotiation
counterparts’ confidential information prior to or during a negotiation, sharing “point” values
to be obtained for any negotiation prior to the official class conclusion of the simulation,
looking up any of our negotiation exercises on the internet or gathering any outside
information on the exercises, and information-seeking or intelligence-gathering designed to
give you access to information that you are not intended to have in the exercises.
Participation in class discussions involves active participation that contributes to the
class. Active participation entails asking and answering questions, making observations,
commenting on other students’ comments, or challenging or advancing a point-of-view.
Making a contribution means your comments move the discussion forward.
Note: This course has a strict attendance policy. To use our time most effectively,
I must determine negotiation partners in advance. It is essential that you provide
24 hour advance notice to me if you have to miss a negotiation. If you do not, the
entire class may be inconvenienced. If you miss a negotiation without prior
notice, you will be penalized in the final grading. Even if you do provide prior
notice, but miss multiple classes, you may also be penalized.
Preparation counts toward your grade, as follows:
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 3 of 12
NOTE: All written requirements MUST BE SUBMITTED AS A HARD COPY AT THE
START OF CLASS ON THE DUE DATE.
a. Course preparation: self-assessment and goal statement – due Sept 3
Complete a two-paragraph (< 1 page double-spaced) goal statement that includes a
frank assessment of your negotiation strengths and weaknesses (1 paragraph) and a
declaration of a personal goal – what you want to get out of the course. You will be
more likely to improve if you decide what you want out of this course.
b. Exercise preparation (3@4% each, 3@6%) – due with cases (see Schedule)
Starting with session 3 (Sept 10), you will complete and submit a preparation sheet
for each sim that prompts you to frame a learning experiment, and work through the
key issues, interests and positions important to all sides in the negotiation. The prep
sheet template is available in the “Content” section of Blackboard.
Typed hard copies of prep sheets are due to me at the start of class. Make a
copy for yourself so you can consult your prep sheet during your negotiation.
How are these graded? You may receive a grade of check plus, check or check
minus; the mode is a check (√). A check plus (√+) is roughly an A, a check
(√) roughly a B+, and a check minus (√-) roughly a B-.
LATENESS POLICY: Prep sheets must be submitted as a hard copy on the day
they are due. They are due whether you attend class or not. Failure to submit a
hard copy on the due date means forfeiting three to four-and-a-half percent of your
total grade per submission – up to a total of thirty (30) percent. That’s a lot!!!
2. Mid-term Exam (20%)
There will be one mid-term exam scheduled Oct 22. The mid-term focus is on your
knowledge of key course concepts as presented in the required texts, readings and
lectures. Expect multiple choice, true-false, matching, and/or short essay questions.
3. Learning Experiments and Personal Self-Assessment (20%) – due Nov 12
Each participant will design and conduct at least three (3) personal learning experiments
intended to improve or enhance your negotiation skills and/or style. A learning
experiment is derived from reflection upon an “as is” condition, where an “as is” condition
is linked to “concrete experience” (to be defined and illustrated in class). A learning
experiment is based upon an “if – then” proposition about behavior and its
consequences. It might take the following form: “If I try new behavior X, then outcome Y
will happen”. Your experiment will be a test of the validity of the hypothesis. The setting
for a learning experiment is any in- or out of-class negotiation exercise.
A learning experiment may explore any behavior you deem to have the potential for
improving your negotiation effectiveness. Points of departure for identifying and
formulating a “learning experiment” may include, for example, the following:
For example, one might “experiment” with:

Your style profile from the Bargaining Styles Assessment Tool

Feedback gleaned from your Partner Feedback Forms

Styles or behaviors suggested by the required readings

Aggressive negotiating style and behavior

Cooperative negotiating style and behavior
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 4 of 12

Anger, toughness, holding firm to a position

Friendliness, sincerity

Comfort with conflict

Silence

Pursuit of integrative outcomes

Etc…
For each learning experiment, specify the following:

The purpose or objective of the experiment

The relevance or personal meaning of the experiment

The action or behavior undertaken

An assessment of your effectiveness in executing the experiment

A statement of the outcome of the experiment

A statement as to how, if at all, your first learning experiment informed the
design and execution of your second learning experiment

A statement as to how, if at all, your second learning experiment informed the
design and execution of your third learning experiment
The Deliverable: Write an integrated 8-10 page assessment of self as negotiator.
This is an opportunity to reflect upon and track your personal development as a
negotiator across the term. Briefly address each of the following:

Restate (modifying as appropriate) the learning goal(s) you submitted at the
second class session.

Discuss your bargaining style profile. What insights does this provide? What
learning experiment opportunities does it propose?

Briefly describe each of your learning experiments (minimum of 3) in terms of
the situation of the experiment, its goal, design, implementation, and outcome.
Include a statement of your perception of each experiment’s effectiveness.

What did you learn from the experiments?

How, if at all, have your experiments affected your negotiation style and skills?
(NOTE – you may find it useful to include analysis of your negotiation videos).

Reference your partner feedback forms. What do you learn about yourself, your
negotiation style and approach? What insights do you derive about yourself as
a negotiator based upon partner feedback forms and videotaped sims?

How, if at all, do you see various forms of cognitive bias impacting your style?

What do you now see as the strengths of your style? Its shortcomings?

How might your style interfere with your ability to achieve desired outcomes?

How do you rate your personal effectiveness in

-
Distributive transactions?
-
Integrative negotiations?
What new learning goal(s) can you formulate for yourself to further enhance
your skills and capabilities as an effective negotiator?
Be sure to include (and cite) references to course concepts in the texts and readings.
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 5 of 12
4. Group Project (30%) – due Dec 3
A group project and group paper is required, along with a class presentation of it at the
end of the semester. The paper should contain about 15 pages of focused, thoughtful,
and insightful analysis, in addition to the couple of pages necessary to describe the
situation or setting. The target length for the paper is twenty pages of 12 point, doublespaced, paginated text excluding bibliography and appendices. The optimal group size
will be based on the number of students enrolled. The length of the in-class team
presentation will be determined based upon total number of teams. For planning
purposes, assume 15 minutes presentation, 3 minutes Q&A.
For the project, analyze real-world agreements (or failures to agree! – Summer 2011’s
debt ceiling negotiation, the more recent debt ceiling negotiations are among those top
of mind). Unless approved by me, the agreement(s) selected must have been
transacted within the last three years. This may be one in which you have personal
knowledge, have access to participants, or which you can analyze through publicly
available documents. Papers will take a couple pages to set up and describe the
situation, followed by analysis based upon the appropriate application of course
concepts. Some questions that might guide your analysis include the following: What
kind of agreement was it? Who were (are) the stakeholders? Who were the primary
parties to the negotiation? What were the parties’ interests, rights, power, and
positions? What problem(s) were they attempting to solve? How did negotiator bias
come into play? Were there significant ethical considerations? What went wrong/well,
why? How would you evaluate their effectiveness? What could have been done
differently? How was the process linked to the outcome?
You may negotiate a format with me.
Please turn in a paragraph of your topic for approval and feedback by Week 5, Sept 24 .
Turn in a well-developed working outline by Week 11, Nov 5.
Final Group Projects due for all groups, Dec 3.
(5%) Class Ranking of Team Presentations. Each presentation will be ranked by the
rest of the class based upon their perceptions of the quality and effectiveness of
the presentation, and its learning value.
Post working draft of .ppt file to Blackboard no later than 12 hours prior to your
presentation. Provide me a full-page hard copy of final version at presentation.
(15%) Team Paper. Grading of the paper will focus on your ability to use concepts from
class to analyze a negotiation and agreement, as described above, and offer
thoughtful insights that can help readers understand the case in question. I
expect all members to contribute equally to the team project and paper. The
group project grade is the highest possible individual grade. If you contribute
less than other team members, your individual grade will be lower than the group
grade.
(10%) Peer Evaluation. As I will have no window into your team’s process and
individual contributions, you will have an opportunity to evaluate the performance
of each of your team members. As the peer evaluation accounts for literally 10%
of your total grade, peer evaluations can represent the difference in an entire
letter grade (e.g., from an A- to a B-) in the calculation of your final course grade.
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 6 of 12
Viewing Your Negotiation Tapes
Each ELC negotiation is video-recorded. To view a negotiation, fill out a recording slip and write
down the record number. This will allow you to store and retrieve the video for later viewing.
ELC tapes are stored at JKP 201K. There is a dubbing station in JKP 201K. Viewing (not
dubbing) can be done in the JKP ELC rooms on the second and third floors. These rooms are
first come-first served. Viewing can also be done at the Keck Center (BRI 200).
Academic Integrity Policy
The Marshall School is committed to upholding the University’s Academic Integrity code as
detailed in the SCampus Guide. It is the policy of the Marshall School to report all violations of
the code. Any serious violation or pattern of violations of the Academic Integrity Code will result
in the student’s expulsion from the degree program.
It is particularly important that you are aware of and avoid plagiarism, cheating on exams,
fabricating data for a project, submitting a paper to more than one professor, or submitting a
paper authored by anyone other than yourself.
Above and beyond the general campus guidelines for academic integrity, the following behaviors
are regarded as cheating in this class: reading negotiation counterparts’ confidential information prior
to negotiating, sharing “point” values to be obtained for any negotiation prior to the official class
conclusion of the simulation, looking up any of our negotiation exercises on the internet or gathering
any outside information on the exercises, and information-seeking or intelligence-gathering designed
to give you access to information that you are not intended to have in the exercises. If you have
doubts about any of these practices, confer with me.
Resources on academic dishonesty can be found on the Student Judicial Affairs Web site
(http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/SJACS). The “Guide to Avoiding Plagiarism” addresses
issues of paraphrasing, quotations, and citation in written assignments, drawing heavily upon
materials used in the university’s writing program. “Understanding and avoiding academic
dishonesty” addresses more general issues of academic integrity, including guidelines for
adhering to standards concerning examinations and unauthorized collaboration. The “20122013 SCampus” (http://scampus.usc.edu/university-student-conduct-code/) contains the
university’s student conduct code.
Students with Disabilities
Any student requesting academic accommodations based on a disability is required to register
with Disability Services and Programs (DSP) each semester. A letter of verification for
approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP. Please be sure the letter is delivered to
me as early in the semester as possible. DSP is located in STU 301 and is open 8:30 a.m. –
5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The phone number for DSP is (213) 740-0776.
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 7 of 12
BASIC INDUSTRIES
1. Analyze the decision alternatives facing Pete Adams.
2. What is Pete Adams’ “frame” of the situation? How does he construct his perception of the
situation?
3. What is Mason’s and Courtney’s “frame”? How do they construct their perception of the
situation?
4. Develop your recommendation with accompanying rationale for your preference regarding the
capacity decision and the location decision. In effect, “frame” the problem from your point-of
view. In formulating your response, refer to the Sussman article in the Course Reader, How to
Frame a Message: The Art of Persuasion and Negotiation. Utilize his 4-step process for
constructing a frame.
5. What advice would you give Pete Adams regarding the location and capacity decisions? Why?
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 8 of 12
Peer Rating Form for Team Project
Project Topic: ___________________________________________________
Rank order each of the members of your group INCLUDING yourself on each of the items
below (1 is best, 2 is next best, etc.). The Peer Evaluation counts towards each student’s final
grade. Use the back of this form for required comments as per the guidance at the bottom of this
page.
Please list each of your group members below in alphabetical order by last name. Be sure to
include yourself.
ALPHABETICAL by LAST NAME, then FIRST
Group Members:
A.
________________________________________________
B.
________________________________________________
C.
________________________________________________
D.
________________________________________________
E.
________________________________________________
F.
________________________________________________
Rating Criterion
/
Group Member
A
B
C
D
E
F
1. Quality of contribution to group discussions
2. Quality of contribution to writing the assignment
3. Quality of contribution to organizing the assignment
4. Quality of initiative when something needed to get done.
5. Reliability in completing assigned responsibilities
6. Amount of effort put forth.
7. Commitment to the group
8. Leadership, motivation provided to the group.
9. Emphasis on getting the task done.
10. Emphasis on cooperation and working well with others.
11. Would want to work with this group member again.
TOTAL
Assign an alphabetical grade to each member of the group based on your
OVERALL impression of her/his contribution to the group’s
performance. You may assign a group member any grade from 0 to A+.
However, you cannot assign A’s to more than 60% of your total group
members. A 5-person group cannot have more than three
A’s, 6 persons = 4 A’s.
Failure to observe this requirement will result in all
team members receiving a “B” for their peer
evaluations.
On the following page, provide at least three directly observable behaviors that represent what you
believe each team member did well, AND at least three behaviors that you observed that represent areas
for improvement/development for each team member. This is NOT about personalities, but rather it is
about those behaviors that are in service and supportive of successful team work and those behaviors that
are not.
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 9 of 12
Peer Rating Form for Team Project
Project Topic: ___________________________________________________
A:___________________
Did Well (behaviors):
Area for improvement/development (behaviors):
B:___________________
Did Well (behaviors):
Area for improvement/development (behaviors):
C:___________________
Did Well (behaviors):
Area for improvement/development (behaviors):
D:___________________
Did Well (behaviors):
Area for improvement/development (behaviors):
E:___________________
Did Well (behaviors):
Area for improvement/development (behaviors):
F:___________________
Did Well (behaviors):
Area for improvement/development (behaviors):
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 10 of 12
MOR 569 – Schedule of Sessions, Readings and Deliverables
Week Date
Fall 2013
Topic / Assignment
Exercise
Due
1
Aug 27
Introduction/ Course Overview
Course structure, process, requirements
Lewicki, C1: The Nature of Negotiation
Sugar Bowl
2
Sept 3
Types of Negotiation – Claiming Value
Lewicki, C2: Strategy and Tactics of Distributive Bargaining
Coffee Contract
Goal statement
3
Sept 10
Types of Negotiation – Creating Value
Fisher & Ury, Getting to Yes – ALL!
Lewicki, C3: Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation
Texoil,
Read general
information (CR)
IPS-1: Texoil prep sheet (4%)
4
Sept 17
Negotiation Style & Negotiation Strategy
Lewicki, C4: Negotiation: Strategy and Planning
Principled
Negotiation
(Hacker – Star)
Bargaining Styles Assessment
(Complete, score, review)
5
Sept 24
Frames and the Social Construction of Reality
Senge, C10: Mental Models
Sussman, Business Horizons: How to Frame a Message:
The Art of Persuasion and Negotiation
Basic Industries
Group Project Topic due
Cognition and Emotion in Negotiation
Lewicki, C5: Perception, Cognition, Emotion
Lewicki, C7: Finding and Using Negotiation Power
Viking
Where’s Alvin,
Read general
Information (CR)
6
Oct 1
7
Oct 8
Power, Persuasion, Influence
Lewicki, C6: Communication
Lewicki, C8: Ethics in Negotiation
8
Oct 15
Midterm Exam – Lewicki Chapters 1 – 9;
Getting to Yes – all;
Senge, Mental Models;
Sussman, How to Frame a Message
9
Oct 22
Relationships in Negotiation
Lewicki, C9: Relationship in Negotiation
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
IPS-2: New Recruit prep sheet
(4%)
IPS-3: Viking prep sheet (4%)
New Recruit negotiated prior
to Oct 9
Bullard House,
Read general
information (CR)
Page 11 of 12
TPS-1: Bullard House prep
sheet (6%)
Week
10
Date
Oct 29
Topic / Assignment
Exercise
Due
11
Nov 5
Team and Multi-Party Negotiations (1)
Lewicki, C10: Multiple Parties and Teams
Gadgets, Inc,
Read general
information
TPS-2: Gadgets prep sheet
(6%)
12
Nov 12
Team & Multi-Party Negotiations (2)
Rice: Individual, Group and Intergroup Processes
Trust Building in Intergroup Relations
Alpha – Beta,
Read general
information
Personal Self-Assessments
due (20%)
13
Nov 19
Cross-Cultural Negotiation
Lewicki, C11: International and Cross-Cultural Negotiation
Nora – Sakari
TPS-3: Nora-Sakari team prep
sheet (6%)
14
Nov 26
Negotiating Long-Term Relationships
Thompson, C11: Tacit Negotiations and Social Dilemmas
Mouse,
Read background
information
15
Dec 3
Team Presentations
Final Offer
Group Projects Due (30%)
Prep Sheets
INDIVIDUAL PREP SHEETS (IPS)
TEAM PREP SHEETS (TPS)
IPS (3 @ 4% each)
Weight
Due Date
TPS (3 @ 6% each)
Weight
Due Date
Texoil
4%
Sept 10
Bullard Houses
6%
Oct 22
New Recruit
4%
Sept 24
Gadgets
6%
Nov 5
Viking Inv
4%
Oct 1
Nora-Sakari
6%
Nov 19
MOR 569: Negotiation and Deal-Making
Page 12 of 12