Luke Hillegass MGMT 450 Blog

(1)  For the Live8 negotation, I played the role as the owner.  My partner and I negotiated over text message.  She initailly made the first offer, and noted that she would be fine with paying more.  Her first offer was $500,000.  I asked if she could go to 600,000, and after some back and forth, we both agreed.  I thought the negotation was unqiue and allowed each party to think more before their next move.   (2) I feel as though with us not being in person, I missed a lot of valuable information.  Such as reading my partner's facial expressions and being able to judge what they were going to say without actually saying it.  Additionally, doing it in person allows for a "mistake" or lapse in judgment, where as they isn't a huge possibility over text. (3) Going off of that, doing it on text message was extremely simple; however, I feel as though it takes away a lot of the factors of the negotiation.  You are unable to read facial express...

 Out of the 6 principles from the article, I feel I use the principle of authority (Defer to experts) the most.  In negotiations, whether that be in class or in my daily life, I tend to bring up articles or facts from experts or trusted sources to get my point across.  This offers a form of authenticity, knowing that most people will believe an expert in a field over me.  For example, if I am talking to my friends about football and want to prove a point, I will pull up a quote from an NFL insider to back up my claim.  I believe that personally, I am most susceptible to the principle of scarcity.  I feel like sometimes I tend to jump the gun on things of limited quantity and think that I am getting a better deal than I really am if there is less of something.  If somebody exploits this, I tend to fold to it.  I have tried to get better at it and feel like I am developing it, but it is still something that I struggle with.  I feel the most ben...

 The first reading is 2.8:  Where does power come from?  What I am gaining from this reading is how developing skills can yield power.  The text gave an example of Ronald Regan.  It noted how when he took office, mass communication was at an all-time high.  He hadn't had a ton of experience dealing with this kind of thing, but as he developed the skill, him and others around him gained power and experience from it.  This is something I can relate to as the President of my fraternity.  Before I took the position, I had experience doing behind-the-scenes work, but nowhere near the amount of people management work I would soon be doing.  As I did it, it became easier, and the people around me and I rose to power.   The second reading is 3.10: Can't beat them? Join a Colition.  This article uses an example of a rancher who is negotiating over leasing rights.  This example illustrates how powerful a coalition can be.  Even if y...

 While reading 4.1 "Women Don't Ask", it was very surprising to me the statistics behind women asking for things less than men.  Prior to reading this, I would have predicted the metrics to be the opposite.  Another shocking finding was the salary.  I did not think, before reading this, that the statistics would be so drastic due to a simple negotiation.   I would say the school of negotiation I fit most into is the 'What goes around, comes around'.  I feel my strategy typically has shades of the poker school, but I tend to try to be more cooperative and make the deal work for both sides.  I often find myself thinking that if I blatantly mislead the other side, that is going to leave a sour taste in their mouth and encourage them to become more competitive against me.  As the text mentions, credibility is crucial in negotiation.  Personally, credibility is a large factor for me, as well as morals.  I prefer to tell the truth while negoti...

 If I were to go back, I think I would alter how I arranged my resources.  Going into the negotation, I wanted to make a deal with RR.  After seeing others negotaite it, I realized the Four Com would be preffered and a better alternative.  With that said, I would have gave less points towards making an agreement with RR and overall less points on the table, knowing that the four com offer is a better fit.  The original offer would have yielded 5 points, with the only thing covered being the relocation, and a partial relocation coverage at that.   The revised offer would have yieleded 17 points, which is still much lower than ideal.  The four com offer would have yielded 43 points, which is signifigantly higher than the other options.   Doing this negotiation over again, I would have needed a much better offer from RR to even consider, knowing how ideal the four com offer is.  

 Scoring system for Joe Tech Title - 25 point maximum Product Manager - 25 points Associate Product Manager with guaranteed end year bonus - 15 points Associate product manager with 6-12 month review process - 10 points Associate Product Manager - 0 points Salary - 10 points maximum 98-101k - 10 points 94k-97k - 7 points 90k-93k - 5 points 88k - 0 points Assignment - 20 points maximum Immediate switch to business development - 20 points Start in Product management with a 6-12 month transition plan - 15 points Verbal commitment to transition- 5 points no movement - 0 points Signing bonus - 10 points max 18k+ - 10 points 15-17k - 8 points 11-14k - 5 points 10k (No change) - 0 points Relocation - 10 points Full relocation - 10 points Move covered - 8 points Partially covered - 5 points No change - 0 points Year-end bonus - 13 points Guaranteed 15-20% bonus - 13 points Guarnteed 10% - 8 points  Guarenteed 5% - 5 points No guarantee - 0 points Stock options - 7 points Any increase ...

 During my negotation simulation last week, my strategy was very much so collaboritive.  I wanted to work with my partner to come to a common ground, but still wanted to make sure my needs were met.  With the facts in mind, failing to come to an agreemnent could figuratively cost myself my job, and my partner his job.  Going into it, I wanted to do what I could to make that known.  Luckily, my partner was moreso looking to compromise and completely split the benefits.  I tried, at first, to still gain an edge, but make sure the other party was benefiting too.  Ultimately, we did not get too far with gaining an edge, and decided to leave even, which I believe was the best choice.   Interestingly enough, I feel if I started with a compromise type mindset at first, I could have worked towards a collaboration or even competetive strategy.  My partner could sense that though I wanted both sides to benefit, I was aggressive at first and was trying ...