Business negotiation course at the Paris-Sorbonne University

Week 4 - November 27th Good morning, I will give my comments about today's course (CPA case group negotiations). After a course about making concession and collaboration, listening and convincing techniques (I particularly liked the part about how to answer to manipulation techniques), we made a group negotiation: CPA case. The case deals with a fight after a payroll check theft, two long-standing employees accusing a new employee to be the thief and asking for layoff in front of the head of payroll. We were split in 3 parties: Roo Smith & Dana Petski (I was part of this group with Caroline and Assem), Sandy Brown (the accused employee, Valentin) and J.T. (the head of payroll, Joy). Our negotiation was loud and not so much cooperative from our side (according to the case's instructions) but we managed to end up with a provisional solution: J.T.-Joy promised to transfer Sandy-Valentin to another department of the company while she (J.T.-Joy) will add cameras in ...

Good morning, Last week (November 13th), we did 2 exercises of negotiation. (comment written on the day of the course, with frech memories as the teacher adviced us) > First exercise of negotiation: I was buyer with Jessica (we played together); Marina was the seller. We needed 1,000 kilogram of premium-quality cinnamon for our baby-food products. The context was more complex as the last courses' negotiation, with different parameters as government subsidies, reputation about quality of products, reputation about payment terms, concurrents... The fact that we had many parameters with figures and pourcentages was making the negotiation harder for me because while the discussion and price evolved, I had to recalculate the value a few times. But the advantage of the complexity of the factors of that case is that we could create value, so enlarge our possibilities for the deal. That's how we end up by accepting the possibility of a future long ter...