Power Balance

User Generated

znl911

Description

Review the Mini-Case: Power Balance (found on page 60 of the textbook). Answer the following questions:

  1. Develop an argument to show that an imbalance of negotiating power probably existed between the parties during the negotiations. Identify the factors accounting for the imbalance.
  2. Identify strategies that either party could have used to increase its negotiating power in this particular negotiation.

For additional details, please refer to the Case Study: Power Balance Guidelines and Rubric document.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

INT 660 Case Study: Power Balance Guidelines and Rubric After reviewing the Mini-Case: Power Balance (found on page 60 of the textbook), students will answer the following questions: 1. Develop an argument to show that an imbalance of negotiating power probably existed between the parties during the negotiatio ns. Identify the factors accounting for the imbalance. 2. Identify strategies that either party could have used to increase its negotiating power in this particular negotiation. Guidelines for Submission: Your case study should follow these formatting guidelines: Use of at least one source, one to two pages double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and citations in APA format. Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Devises a compelling Meets Does not sufficiently argument to “Proficient” demonstrate the demonstrate the criteria and imbalanceof negotiating Argument imbalance of power that existed Demonstratin substantiates negotiating power g Imbalance ideas with clear between that existed and relevant thepartiesduringthe between the examples negotiation parties during the negotiation Meets Identifies the Does not identify all of the “Proficient” factors that factors that accounted for criteria and accounted for the Power the imbalance in Imbalance substantiates imbalanceinnegotiatingpo Factors ideas with clear negotiatingpower wer during the and relevant duringthe negotiations examples negotiations Identifies strategies that Meets either party Does not identify Strategies for “Proficient” couldhaveused to appropriate strategies for Increasing criteria and increaseits increasing negotiation Negotiating substantiates negotiatingpower power in this Power ideas with in this particularnegotiation research particularnegotiati on Submissionis Submission has major freeof errors Submission has no errors related to citations, related to major errors grammar, spelling, syntax, related to Articulation citations, or organization that of Response grammar, citations, grammar, negatively impact spelling,syntax,a spelling, syntax, or readability and articulation nd organization organization of mainideas and is presented Valu e Does not provideanargument to demonstrate the imbalance of negotiating 30 power that existed between the parties during the negotiation Does not identify any factors that accounted for the imbalanceinnegotiatingpo wer during the negotiations 30 Does not includestrategies for increasing negotiation 30 power in this particular negotiation 10 Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas in a professional and easy-to-read format Earned Total 100 % MINI-CASE: Power balance? Sometimes, reaching a negotiated agreement is the only way in which the parties can achieve their goals. That was the case in the 1980s when IBM embarked on negotiations with the Mexican government about establishing production plants in Mexico. Before detailed negotiations began, the two sides had to educate each other, in formal and informal discussions, about computer technology and local conditions respectively. The negotiations themselves were conducted both by means of informal discussions and through a process of formal proposals and responses. At the time of the initial negotiations, IBM’s willingness to contribute resources and technological know-how to the proposed project gave the company great negotiating power. This was matched, however, by the power of the Mexican government whose negotiators were given power to authorise the project – or to turn it down. The resulting power balance led to protracted and complex negotia- tions. Numerous actors, ranging from individuals, groups and departments, to organisations and groups of organisations, were involved at various times in the negotiations. Both sides also went through constant internal negotiations. Eventually, however, a final agreement was reached. A wholly owned IBM operation would produce 603,000 PCs over five years, and transfer new tech- nology within six months of its US debut. Source: Weiss (1996) Questions: 1. Develop an argument to show that in fact an imbalance of negotiating power probably existed between the parties during the negotiations. Identify the factors accounting for the imbalance. 2. Under what circumstances might the power balance swing in favour of the government? What might be the immediate and long-term consequences of such a swing?
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

...


Anonymous
Great! 10/10 would recommend using Studypool to help you study.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags