Assignment 3: Not Just the Beatles – Compare and contrast at least two (2) different negotiation approaches that you would use when negotiating with the individuals mentioned in the scenario
You are the lead singer and manager of a new and quickly rising band, Everyone—from record companies, movie producers, video game producers, magazine editors, and the like—is approaching you. As described in Chapter 26 of the text, you do not want to make the same mistakes Brian Epstein, the manager of the Beatles, made when they made their first movie easily losing the band millions in lost revenue. You have been asked to now take your band to support the troops in a number of war zones. You do not want to engender negative press coverage and agree to a contract with the U.S.O. and Armed Forces Radio.
Any negotiation process aims at arriving at a solution to a challenging situation or problem where the parties have differing interests, values, goals or beliefs. It demands the application of effective approaches and the negotiating parties must assume particular roles that make sure the parties they represent achieve their objectives. In negotiation, there is a need for the parties to have substantial knowledge of the nature of the situation. If one party in the negotiation process has insufficient knowledge or lacks information on the issue, they might negotiate ineffectively costing their team a fortune. For instance, Brian Epstein, the Beatles’ manager had no experience in the movie industry and his negotiation for the group to appear in A Hard Day’s Night cost the band millions in lost revenue (Greathouse, 2015). This essay compares and contrasts two negotiation approaches and applies them to the negotiation process with the U.S.O. and the Armed Forces Radio.
In negotiating with the U.S.O. and the Armed Forces Radio, the two parties must focus on ensuring the interests, values, beliefs or concerns of each are considered. For instance, as the lead singer and manager of the band, the prioritization of the interests of the band and the consideration of its image and representation would be critical. While this is the case, the U.S.O./AFR must consider and protect its interests and goals. In view of the issues, the application of the win-win negotiation approach would guarantee effective negotiation. The approach will ensure that every party in the negotiation achieves its interests and goals. The band must be able to benefit financially from the venture while advancing the interests of the U.S.O and AFR. Moreover, considering that the value of the band in the market and the interest it receives from different companies within the entertainment industry, there is a need for the manager to quote a substantial amount for the agreement to ensure that the band benefits significantly from the contract. However, it would be prudent to let the U.S.O./AFR commit first to understand the terms and the figures the party had planned to avoid demanding a lower value like in the case of the Beatles (Dawson, 2011).
Similarly, in the contract between the band and the U.S.O./AFR, the former can push for the distributive approach or the win-lose negotiation approach. As the manager of the band, the most important thing should be the promotion of the interests and concerns of the band. Following its agreement to a contract, the U.S.O./AFR have already achieved their major objective. The band’s manager must, therefore, promote the interests of the band in the negotiation for benefits to be awarded to the team. This approach would make sure that the band wins the negotiation. The agenda should be to win while making the other party feel like it has won the negotiation (McIntyre, 2006). However, there is a need to have information and knowledge concerning the military, the risks, and the compensation the band should receive. Moreover, overstating the demands in dealing with the U.S.O./AFR, avoiding confrontation and emotional negotiation, and consultation with the band members and experts in military affairs would be critical for promoting a win-lose negotiation approach (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 1992).
In conclusion, the most effective negotiation
approaches for application in the negotiation between the band and the U.S.O./AFR
would be the win-win approach and the win-lose approach. Every party in a
negotiation wants to win or feel like it won the negotiation. Whether it is a
win-win or a win-lose towards the group, all the parties will be satisfied with
the negotiation. Moreover, the efficient application of the win-lose approach
where the U.S.O./AFR feels like it won would favour both parties. As the
manager, it would be important to let the U.S.O./AFR to commit first, consulting
with the band members and experts in military/army and related sectors, and making
the other party reveal useful information about the contract would be of great
importance. Moreover, the manager should always obtain substantial information
and knowledge on the issue and make the U.S.O./AFR feel like it has won in
either approaches while ensuring that the band benefits from the contract greatly.
Dawson, R. (2011). Secrets of power negotiating : inside secrets from a master negotiator, 15th anniversary edition : updated for the 21st century. Pompton Plains, N.J: Career Press.
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1992). Getting to yes : negotiating agreement without giving in (2 Edition ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Greathouse, J. (2015, July 25). This Rookie Mistake Cost The Beatles $100,000,000. Retrieved from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngreathouse/2015/07/25/this-rookie-mistake-cost-the-beatles-100000000/#52aef1274678
McIntyre, L. (2006). Essentials for government contract negotiators. Vienna: Managementconcepts.