I Invested A Significant Amount Of Time For The Byrnes, Byrnes & Townsend Negotiation Meeting

The negotiation approach I used begin with me first creating a friendly environment with Mr. Hardline (Counsel for ELM) then I pinpointed the actions my office was willing to bring light to such as breach of contract, age discrimination, wrongful termination, failure for EMC to stick to Employee Relations Law, and a comment regarding the IRS “smelling the blood.” After this point, and having described both sides position, I let Mr. Hardline initiate the first pension offer, which he started at $50,000. I then said my client was ready to go to court and bring forward the above mentioned claims to any appropriate government agency for thorough review. Furthermore, I mentioned to Mr. Hardline my client had requested I bring a lawsuit forward for $1,000,000 if he didn’t receive a fair offer. At this point it was already 3:10 p.m. and we were rushed to make it back to class in time, so I convinced the opposing party we should settle rather than come back empty handed, and so, he upped his offer to $100,000. By this time, I had secured a generous pension, scored way above what my client was satisfied with receiving in terms of his pension, so yes, I would say I was successful. Ii. What I learned from this negotiation was that either my partner didn’t do his readings in advance or was playing me like a fool because I had to explain the whole story to the guy, which obviously took most of our time that we could

The ABA Law Student Division's Negotiation Competition promotes greater interest among law students in legal negotiation and provides a means for them to practice and improve their negotiating skills. The

Gina Blair represented a competitive-cooperative negotiation strategy which represented a middle ground, both combined in a style which was open minded but assertive. Gina had scheduled the telephone meeting between herself and Daniel Trent; therefore she had more knowledge about what was going to be discussed. As she had initiated the negotiation she had prepared well for the issues concerning her clients. She presented her negotiation in a logical structure, showing that she had prepared all the areas of concern which she intended to address. Her preparation allowed her to identify and prioritise her client’s concerns. She avoided small talk and was very direct, her approach was assertive and she projected confidence. She had a clear understanding of the issues which were of concern to her clients and had proposed

In our recent negotiation, my partner Dave and I assumed the roles of Alan Hacker, a computer software developer, and Alan Hacker’s lawyer. Being the lawyer in the negotiation my objective was to avoid litigation with my client’s partner Stanley Star and to aid in the continuation of my client’s co-owned company HackerStar. In addition, I would assist Hacker in coming to an agreement that would be satisfying for him both personally and financially. I felt that Dave and I presented a reasonable argument on Hacker’s behalf and, since I was able to apply some of our class readings during the process, I was overall pleased with the outcome.

However, there are a few occasions where, because of the excessive entanglement between the individuals and resulting personal emotions, settlements are much harder to reach. Judge Sokoloff shined and used her art of mediation and influencing here, effectively allowing the parties before her to compromise. I was surprised by her very efficient and very effective use of the mediation tactic; so much so, that it has in fact influenced me a great deal. Firstly, the experience showed me the importance of mediation, and its efficiency within the legal process. Secondly, the experience instilled in me the importance of a legal practitioner’s temperament, and the effect that it can have on the judicial process. Thirdly, and probably the most impacting of the points was, the experience allowed me to realize that I was not as far off in my understanding of the legal field as I initially believed, rather intellectually I was able to relate to many of the

In any negotiation, preparation is crucial; and having a set, outlined process to follow when preparing helps mitigate a potential oversight of any significant issues within the negotiation. Following a set process also helps one stay on task and in-line with what the important issues and factors are in a negotiation. In Bargaining for Advantage, G. Richard Shell provides a well-structured framework to follow in planning for a negotiation. For this reason, I used Shell’s negotiation preparation framework to plan for the negotiation between Rapid Printing Company (Rapid) and Scott Computers, Inc (Scott).

Good morning, I hope the message finds you well. I am committed to an all-day mediation today, but I have briefly reviewed HDR’s letter. I would like to arrange a time after I have had an opportunity to more fully digest this letter where we can have a conversation about the letter and our options going forward. I have, however, formed some initial thoughts which I have articulated below for your consideration:

In my opinion, Cole and Tisch case was a great opportunity to practice my negotiation skills. This was a case where emotions were highly involved and where the role of communication was highly important to achieve the best mutual negotiated agreement, based on mutual understating, empathy and addressing creative, “out of the box” solutions, which helped both parties to avoid from playing zero-sum game which probably will lead to court where winner takes it all , . One will define this conflict as a public dispute which will have implications on a few different parties, which will have to deal with

The negligence principle is sometimes partly determined by eyewitness accounts and even citations provided to

Negotiation is a fundamental form of dispute resolution involving two or more parties (Michelle, M.2003). Negotiations can also take place in order to avoid any future disputes. It can be either an interpersonal or inter-group process. Negotiations can occur at international or corporate level and also at a personal level. Negotiations often involve give and take acknowledging that there is interdependence between the disputants to some extent to achieve the goal. This means that negotiations only arise when the goals cannot be achieved independently (Lewicki and Saunders et al., 1997). Interdependence means the both parties can influence the outcome for the other party and vice versa. The negotiations can be win-lose or win-win in nature.

The order in which things are said is almost as important as what is said, and in some cases it is even more important. This has been a long-recognized fact in the world of rhetoric and basic composition from time immemorial. It is only relatively recently, however, that this fundamental truth has been explicitly and consciously explored in the realm of negotiating and information strategy. The additional factor of who receives what information at what time, and the order in which separate entities are approached with different pieces of information, adds a similar but exponentially complicating factor to information exchanges during a negotiating practice. This was made very clear during the Harborco negotiations, as our team was able to use effective negotiation sequencing to our advantage. By striking certain deals first, supplying information and signaling intentions and plans selectively and on a time- and order-specific basis, the Harborco negotiations were handled more smoothly and more effectively than might otherwise have been the case.

1) Was this a Distributive or Integrative negotiation?- was it the optimum approach and why or why not.

This case was prepared by Laura Berazaluce, LLM class 2016, for the course General Counsel at Penn Law, University of Pennsylvania to be evaluated by Professor Daniel Raff. The case was developed solely as the basis for a case analysis and discussion and is not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective deal making.

With the settlement unit’s mission and operating environment thusly defined, I can now make an accurate diagnosis of the problem my capstone will solve, namely, that no court employees have yet undertaken a formal analysis of the settlement conference unit. This is problematic for the court because, while the settlement unit should theoretically save time and money, the court does not know whether such theoretical savings have manifested themselves. By analyzing the

The emphasis is on a systematic, time efficient, results-producing method of preparation that can be used for any level of negotiations (BNS 2014)