NPLogoTransparent
 
Teaching Negotiation

A bi-annual e-newsletter from NP@PON

(Negotiation Pedagogy at the Program on Negotiation)


Volume 4, Issue 1
Summer 2011
 
In This Issue
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Camera: Video in Negotiation Pedagogy
Why Classic Cases?
Clearinghouse Customers Speak!
PON Clearinghouse Top Sales 2010
About NP@PON
Negotiation Journal Welcomes Submissions on Teaching

 

Dear Colleagues, 

Do you use video to teach negotiation? Have you used any of PON's classic cases? Do you have any suggestions for improving the PON Clearinghouse? We invite you to share your thoughts on negotiation and mediation pedagogy on our online NP@PON Discussion Forum.  

 

  How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Camera: Video in Negotiation Pedagogy
by Carrie O'Neil

 

How can video be used to enhance the teaching of negotiation? This question was addressed by Michael Moffitt from the University of Oregon Law School in his presentation called "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Camera: Video in Negotiation Pedagogy" at the NP@PON faculty dinner seminar on April 21, 2011. The seminar was organized by NP@PON directors Larry Susskind (MIT) and Michael Wheeler (Harvard Business School). Each semester NP@PON brings together PON-affiliated faculty to discuss new research, insights, and ideas about how to enhance negotiation and mediation instruction.

 

Michael Moffitt shared quite a few ways that video can be used in experiential law school negotiation classes. He explained how simple it is to incorporate informal video recordings of simulated negotiations into class discussion. The state of the technology allows students to make videos of themselves and distribute them in real time with no production costs at all. Videos allow instructors to capture data that might otherwise be lost since each person's recollection of a negotiation varies from the actual event. There are literally more than a dozen ways to use video to enhance student learning in classes and on-line that focus on different combinations of students interacting, students interacting with faculty, and both students and faculty interacting with outsiders.

Some possible arrangements include:

Undirected view: Have students watch a video of their role play negotiation and identify areas they would like to improve on or discuss in more depth.

Review suggested/directed by faculty: Faculty directs student attention to a particular lesson s/he wants them to pay attention to in their independent viewing of their video. 

Written analysis of clip selected by student (with or without faculty guidance): Students watch their video and are asked to choose a short snippet to analyze and annotate (for instance, the moment in a negotiation when someone put the first number out). Videos seem to improve the quality of these analyses because they are based on the tape's record of what happened, not the student's memory, which is often confused with what they intended to have happen.

Preparation for feedback session with faculty: Students watch the tape of their negotiation and identify a portion they want to discuss with the professor. Professor Moffitt showed an example of a negotiation with multiple students, all of whom had identified the same three minutes out of over five hours of tape. For those watching these excerpts for the first time, the few minutes the students selected seem unremarkable. As Professor Moffitt explained what each student took from those moments, he was very glad there was a video record of these exchanges. Watching the video and hearing what the individual students had to say were very revealing.

Feedback memo: Students review the video and write a memo to their negotiation counterpart with feedback. Video allows students to ground their feedback in ways that are easier for their partners to accept. Professor Moffitt noted that the quality of peer feedback is higher with videos than when students are given only oral feedback to one another directly after a negotiation. Students also tend to be more thoughtful when feedback is structured in this more formal way, when they have time to reflect and review the tape, and when they know the professor will be reviewing it.

"You be the teacher" day: Student pairs are given twelve minutes of class time to show a portion of their videos from the semester and distill key moments of learning. Professor Moffitt sometimes gives students an opportunity to re-script and re-shoot earlier negotiations for which they want a "do-over." The quality of student presentations is generally high because they do not want to waste their colleagues' or the professor's time.

Peer written analysis of student-selected clips: Students are asked to analyze a part of a another student's negotiation video. In Professor Moffitt's experience, students are often good at analyzing their own and their counterparts' performance in negotiations, but not as strong in guessing what is going on with others. Since all three skills are important, this exercise in third person observation helps strengthen important skills.

Voyeurism enabling (for reputation, preparation, etc): Students are given access to their peers' negotiation videos and told their pairings in advance for a new negotiation exercise. Many students watch each other's negotiations in preparation, hoping to identify negotiation styles and patterns. Professor Moffitt asserts that in real-life negotiations one is likely to be familiar with a counterpart's style and patterns ahead of time.

In-class illustration or demonstration with faculty selected video clip: Faculty view student negotiation videos and choose examples to show the class. This can be very labor intensive for the faculty, though students respond very favorably when examples are used from the course they are currently taking as opposed to stock examples.

Online "I Like/Don't Like" / Commentary: Possible future uses for videos in negotiation instruction involve engaging a broader audience in the conversation. What would it be like to get input on negotiation style and substance not only from classmates and faculty but from a vast number of users of the internet? Professor Moffitt speculates that there is potential for getting commentary on negotiation videos from broader audiences, similar to the way outsiders are eager to comment on products on Amazon.com or liking or commenting on something on Facebook.

Student learning portfolio (think "writing sample"): Another potential frontier for the use of video in negotiation pedagogy would be to ask students for a portfolio of video clips (rather than a written journal). Students can then use this material in their job searches much like a writing sample.

Professor Moffitt emphasized the difference between using videos sporadically as opposed to six or eight times a semester. Regular use enables his students to see patterns across exercises and make shifts in their own behavior. Another key component in deciding how to use video is to consider the level of faculty involvement required. There are some uses that require very little faculty involvement, and others that are more intensive. Professor Moffitt reports that he no longer uses journals, and finds student feedback and reflection to be more substantive and thoughtful when grounded in video clips.

Professor Moffitt says that he does not videotape everything and that students sometimes feel inhibited when he tells them, "We want you to get better by trying things you might not normally do, now smile for the camera." The use of the camera takes some getting used to, which is why he recommends using this method frequently in course contexts. Also, video might fail to capture certain things and also overemphasize others. For example, in multi-day negotiations, video of the official negotiation does not capture conversations that happen in the hallways or over coffee between the negotiators, which can often be critical moments.

Discussion

A number of questions were posed, including how video might be used in large courses where the professor would not have time to look at numerous video clips. A more general question was raised about whether we think the way to teach students to negotiate is by showing them superlative examples that they can mimic. Or, are we trying to help them improve their performance through their own trial-and-error?  Lawrence Susskind (MIT) suggested that we enable students and faculty to try lots of things, give them feedback and let them learn to make adjustments.

Daniel Shapiro (Harvard Law School) asked how Professor Moffitt measures the success of a student's analysis since there are so many different criteria that could be used for determining if a negotiation is "successful." Professor Moffitt said that he grades students on their analysis of their performance in the negotiation, rather than their abilities as negotiators. He expects student reflections to demonstrate understanding of core course concepts, be grounded in video data, and to ultimately convey the meaning they are making of their performance along with the development of self-awareness.

Lisle Baker (Suffolk University Law School) wondered about the possibility of shortening the time between when the negotiation is captured on video and when it is reviewed and reflected on. Shrinking this time might facilitate even deeper student learning and self-awareness because they will be almost reflecting in action as opposed to reflecting on action. 

The audience was inspired by Professor Moffit's presentation. It is clear that there are many ways of using video in negotiation instruction and that they can offer a powerful teaching tool. The PON Clearinghouse is going to move quickly to distribute a short summary of Professor Moffitt's suggestions with each role play simulation order it fills. 

You are invited to discuss this article further at the NP@PON Discussion Forum. 

 

Why Classic Cases?
  by Carrie O'Neil

 

Why are some negotiation exercises still used in a great many university classes even twenty years after they were written? In an effort to understand more about the enduring quality of some classic teaching materials, we asked faculty affiliated with PON to explain why they think some role play simulations remain bestsellers in the Clearinghouse year after year. 

            

The people we interviewed are faculty who wrote popular cases for very different reasons. Bruce Patton, co-founder of the Harvard Negotiation Project, and one of the authors of Sally Soprano, described the most important learning points that students can learn by playing this game in a basic negotiation course. The exercise challenges students to figure out what they can do when their BATNA is weak. It also teaches students to think about the errors people might make in setting their aspirations lower than they need to. Finally, and most important, it helps students in less than an hour explore the essential differences between principled negotiation and positional bargaining.

 

Lawrence Susskind, co-founder of PON and professor at MIT, wrote two popular multi-party negotiations, Harborco and the World Trade Center game. He credits Harborco's success to the fact that it approximates a multi-party negotiation that students can play in a very short period of time with scoreable results. It also teaches students how to respond to spoilers and how to deal with blocking coalitions.

 

Jeswald Salacuse, Professor of Law at the Fletcher School, wrote the Enco and MedLee simulations for students studying international business negotiation. His purpose was to show students how they can handle the challenges involved in preparing for and carrying out cross-cultural negotiations. These two games highlight the divergent assumptions and perspectives that often arise from cultural differences.

 

Many of the Clearinghouse bestsellers underscore discrete teaching lessons that are central to interest-based negotiation. Bruce Patton talks about the importance and difficulty of creating two plausible and coherent, yet clashing viewpoints. "Enduring cases have to tell a persuasive, internally consistent story from each party's point of view. But the two are very much at odds; so, when you read both, you get different 'ah has'." He emphasized that writing "cases that sing" is not as easy as some people might assume. He attributes the success of the cases he's worked on to a process of rigorous evaluation and revision. A number of interviewees referred to the thoroughness required to write a good teaching game. The designer has to make sure that there are no holes or information that one side knows that the other should not.

 

Daniel Shapiro, Associate Director of the Harvard Negotiation Project, described some of the classic cases as both accessible and sophisticated. "Some of the classic PON cases, like Sally Soprano and Oil Pricing, boil very complex dynamics down to essential structures. That is their gift. Sally Soprano has an elegant structure that more clearly than any other case raises the critical elements of interest-based negotiation... The participant can immediately see during a debrief what the benefits of interest-based negotiation are over a more adversarial process."

 

Robert Bordone, Director of the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program, pointed out a pedagogical advantage to an exercise like Sally Soprano. "Since most people don't know anything about opera, they will not be able to fight about content. Instead they'll talk more about behaviors and moves, and not the details of what is right." For his basic negotiation courses, he tries to use exercises that take students out of the context with which they are most familiar. He wants to make sure they focus on skill building and behaviors that work.

 

Michael Wheeler, Professor of Management Practice at Harvard Business School, discussed his top PON Clearinghouse sellers Appleton vs. Baker and Tendley Contract, explaining that classic cases are crisp, but contextually rich, and allow the instructor to extract concrete lessons about the fundamentals of negotiation. In particular, when taught in sequence, Wheeler said, "the instructor can use these two cases as prototypes for comparison and synthesis." One practical consideration is the strict time budget instructors often have to work with. These classic games have rich teachable lessons that can be developed within very strict time constraints.

 

Jeswald Salacuse credited many cases' enduring popularity to the accompanying teaching notes that offer well-crafted and extensive advice on how to organize class discussions. Similarly, Robert Bordone credited part of Powerscreen's popularity to the optional supplements that the Clearinghouse provides, like the Seven Element Prep Sheet, that make it easier for instructors to get to the most important lessons and insights that are aiming to convey.

 

Some interviewees suggested that the exercises listed above might continue to be popular because teachers prefer to keep using the cases they know.  As their mastery of the teaching material improves so does the impact they have on their students. When a game or an exercise works well, there is often little incentive to seek out others.  

 

Looking Ahead

 

Although a number of the Clearinghouse bestsellers have anchored the teaching of interest-based negotiation thus far, a number of interviewees point to the fact that the field has broadened and deepened rather substantially since the classics games and exercises were written. Many of the most popular cases tend to be used in basic negotiation courses, but now more schools and training programs want to move on to advanced instruction. New frames for understanding other features of negotiation will require new cases to teach new skills.

 

Lawrence Susskind described identity- and value-based conflicts as one focus for advanced negotiation instruction. Interests are tradeable, but values and identity are not. He asked, "What do you do when the outcome of a dispute resolution effort is not likely to be resolution? Can we teach students how to reconcile conflicting interests when conflicting values are at stake? All the introductory tools we have given them that assume interests can be traded to produce resolution don't apply in a values-based or identity-based context. PON currently has three values-based mediation exercises and is developing others.   

 

Bruce Patton highlights the ongoing need for cases or games that respond to emerging topics of concern like social media and its impact on reputation. These are particularly relevant in the age of Facebook. He has suggested that PON seek more customer feedback regarding the themes and topics they would like to see covered in new Clearinghouse teaching materials.

 

Daniel Shapiro suggests that the Clearinghouse develop more inter-cultural cases. Though he has used Sally Soprano and other role play simulations in diverse contexts, and gotten a positive response, the next step might be to consider tailoring cases to other culturally-specific contexts. Robert Bordone suggests that the Clearinghouse needs to keep the classics up-to-date, by changing the dates and numbers to adjust for inflation so the games feel more relevant. 

 

Top selling PON cases can be found here

You are invited to discuss this article further at the NP@PON Discussion Forum.

 

  
Clearinghouse Customers Speak! 

by Carrie O'Neil


In an effort to understand more about how the PON Clearinghouse does and doesn't meet its customers' needs, we interviewed a number of long-time Clearinghouse clients. We asked what teaching materials they found most valuable and for what reasons. We also asked how they found out about the Clearinghouse and what additional teaching and training resources they would like to see us develop. 

 

Most customers used role play simulations, videos and case studies to teach basic interest-based negotiation workshops or semester-long courses. Most have attended PON workshops in the past.

 

All interviewees acknowledged the value of experiential learning as a supplement to more traditional lectures. Charles Field commented that at the University of Maryland, George Washington University, and other universities where he teaches, role play simulations are not regularly used in the classroom. His students, therefore, are always appreciative of the skill-based, show-don't-tell element of his negotiation courses.  Matthew Saviello from Dover Corporation said, "The materials are fantastic. It is marvelous the way they are written and the how the process can play out in so many different ways."

 

Dawn Effron, adjunct professor at New England Law Boston, spoke about the strength of an exercise like Sally Soprano: "It is an excellent vehicle for introducing the seven element framework. The exercise is wonderfully open-ended in its opportunities for value creation and it brings theory to life in an entertaining way." She also noted that because the subject matter is outside of what is familiar, it gets students out of their comfort zones and allows them to focus on skill building instead of content.

 

Charles Field appreciated the diversity of materials available in the Clearinghouse that appeal to a wide range of students. He said: "I have students who study public policy, city planning, real estate, and you have cases that cover the full range. I use the same cases because I have gotten used to the points I like to make, and I think the cases are well thought through and provide ample substance for students to grapple with various aspects of negotiation." He also incorporates PON cases into the sequence of materials for both his basic and advanced courses. He said, "An area I get into are individuals understanding themselves as negotiators and identifying what drives their behavior and conflict style." He particularly appreciates cases like Oil Pricing that helps sensitize students to what their communication habits are and what they want to work on.

 

James Lawrence of Ohio State University acknowledged videos as being helpful teaching supplements. In particular, the World Trade Center multi-party negotiation video enriches discussion by providing students with an understanding of the many ways situations can play out. Some customers wanted more multi-party cases that are tailored to specific contexts, such as labor negotiations, international contexts and business negotiations with a particular focus on buying and selling.

 

Appreciation for the Clearinghouse's accessible layout, sample syllabi and detailed material summaries were noted by many interviewees. In particular, James Lawrence said, "I am a strong believer in the value of the teaching note, so strong a believer that I don't use an exercise that does not have one because I am aware that when I have done exercises as a participant, reading the teaching note in retrospect always reveals learning points that I might have missed." A few interviewees asked for more robust teaching notes for certain cases in the Clearinghouse.

 

The Difficult Conversations framework worksheet and the seven elements prep sheet were appreciated for the structure they provide to facilitate student learning.

 

Charles Field suggested that PON faculty make regular videos with commentary about current conflicts and how they relate to negotiation. Conversations about events in Egypt and Libya, for example, could contribute to an ongoing dialogue about real-world applications for interest-based negotiation. Giving instructors more resources to explain negotiation's relevance to real world conflicts and events would enhance classroom learning.

 

One interviewee expressed an interest in having a Clearinghouse liaison who could answer customers' targeted questions and recommend materials that deal with particular elements of practice, in the way that the former Director of Curriculum Development used to do.

 

Some interviewees expressed an interest in establishing a more active community of practice. It was suggested that PON expand its online negotiation pedagogy platform, perhaps getting more teachers and trainers to post questions, exchange materials and best practices. For example, Dawn Effron noted that she would be interested in hearing other practitioners' perspectives on teaching negotiation and collaborative law. Introducing collaborative law "is a high point in the semester because after absorbing the principles of interest-based negotiation, students respond strongly to collaborative law as an exciting alternative to traditional legal practice." Students are eager to know how to limit their practice to collaborative or interest-based negotiation. Having a forum to begin these conversations, especially if we could get practitioners involved, would be valuable. This platform might also be a place to incorporate other thinkers from outside PON.

 

We would like to thank our customers for sharing their thoughts with us and for their continued patronage. We take feedback very seriously and invite you to be part of the ongoing conversation on the NP@PON message board. To discuss this article further please comment at the NP@PON Discussion Forum. 

 

PON Clearinghouse Top Sales 2011

 

Top Five Role Simulations  

1. Sally Soprano by Wayne Davis, Mark Gordon and Bruce Patton

This simulation takes place in a meeting between the representative for Sally Soprano, an aging opera singer, and the Lyric Opera, which needs a soprano last minute for an upcoming production. This exercise is an excellent vehicle for comparing principled negotiation and positional bargaining.

2. HarborCo by Denise Madigan, Thomas Weeks, Lawrence Susskind

This is a multi-party simulation in which participants have to negotiate several issues about whether or not to build a port. When the game is played by several groups at the same time, the comparison of outcomes is instructive.

3. Oil Pricing by Roger Fisher

In this group exercise, several participants are on the oil pricing boards of countries that are instructed that maximizing their own profits is their sole objective. The exercise presents rich opportunities to observe, analyze, and critique intra-group dynamics and decision-making.

4. PowerScreen Problem by Bruce Patton, Mark Gordon and Andrew Clarkson

This exercise revolves around the meeting of the lawyers of two partners of a small software company over the ownership of PowerScreen, a new product that one developed against the other's wishes.

5. Casino by Sheila Heen, Scott Peppet and John Richardson

This role play simulation is a two-party intra-organizational discussion between a newly-promoted manager and her division vice-president over work performance, responsibility for a new computer game project, and office environment issues. 

Top Five Videos

1. Mediators at Work: Breach of Warranty by Marjorie Corman Aaron and Dwight Golann 

This video displays the mediation of a typical commercial legal dispute. The case involves a breach-of-warranty suit between two companies over damage that the defendant supplier allegedly caused to the plaintiff company's fleet of trucks by selling it defective antifreeze. The dispute is complicated by the fact that the plaintiff has filed a bad-faith settlement practice claim against the defendant's insurance carrier, as well as by the interests and emotions of the principals of the two family-owned companies. 

2. Hackerstar Negotiation DVD produced by the Harvard Negotiation Project

Two improvisational actors play the roles of partners in a small software company called HackerStar, Inc who are engaged in a dispute over PowerScreen, a new product that one developed against the other's wishes.

3. Mediators at Work: Termination Tempest by Marjorie Corman Aaron and Dwight Golann

This is an unscripted, realistic demonstration of the mediation of an employment dispute about a veteran worker at a restaurant supply company who is suing his employer under the Federal Age Discrimination Act for wrongful termination.

4. Rebuilding the World Trade Center featuring Lawrence Susskind

This DVD shows a group of legal, business, and dispute resolution professionals negotiating the six-person, facilitated role simulation entitled "World Trade Center Redevelopment Negotiation" (also available from the Clearinghouse) regarding the reconstruction of the World Trade Center site in New York City, following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. 

5. Negotiation Pedagogy Video Series, Part 1: Professor Michael Wheeler

The first in the Program on Negotiation's Negotiation Pedagogy Video Series, this video is unscripted and unrehearsed. It shows Harvard Business School Professor Michael Wheeler teaching an actual negotiation class in April 2003, interspersed with excerpts from an after-class interview with Professor Wheeler about his teaching approach. 

Top Five PON Books

1. Negotiation Theory and Practice Edited by J. William Breslin and Jeffrey Z. Rubin

This collection of edited articles reflects the increasing interest in the field of negotiation and serves as a useful "source book" on critical issues in contemporary negotiation scholarship and practice.

2. Teaching Negotiation: Ideas and Innovations by Michael Wheeler

This volume contains twenty-seven pieces of the best writing on negotiation pedagogy from Negotiation Journal and from PON seminar and working papers. The collection is divided into three sections: whether negotiation can be taught; negotiation curriculum design; and specific tools and techniques for negotiation teachers.

3. Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict by William L. Ury, Jeanne M. Brett, and Stephen B. Goldberg

This book presents guidelines for developing systems and procedures to address the ongoing series of disputes that inevitably arise within any relationship or organization. This text presents a basic conceptual framework for dispute systems design, a variety of lessons and examples for practitioners, and a detailed case study. 

4. Making Global Deals: What Every Executive Should Know About Negotiating Abroad by Jeswald W. Salacuse

This book explains how to overcome obstacles - the instability of the international marketplace and differences in culture, ideology, law, politics, and currencies - and come out on top in any size venture.

5. In the Interest of Children: Advocacy, Law Reform, and Public Policy by Robert H. Mnookin, Robert A. Burt, David L. Chambers, Michael S. Wald, Stephen D. Sugarman, Franklin E. Zimring, and Rayman L. Solomon

This book provides a compelling introduction to the workings of the legal system and to five crucial areas of contemporary policy concern relating to children: foster care, teenage pregnancy and abortion, school discipline, institutions for the mentally retarded, and the welfare system.

About NP@PON

Negotiation Pedagogy at the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School (NP@PON) is dedicated to improving the way people teach and learn about negotiation. Incorporating and expanding upon the historical mission of the PON Clearinghouse, NP@PON serves as PON's intellectual focal point for negotiation education.

NP@PON is involved a range of activities including research, curriculum development, training, and networking among those interested in negotiation pedagogy. The formal mission of NP@PON is to:  
  • Contribute to the growing field of negotiation pedagogy through research and publications;
  • Support both experienced and next-generation negotiation educators through workshops, idea exchanges, and other educator-focused events;
  • Foster connections between communities of negotiation educators and education scholars;
  • Develop and distribute teaching materials that are useful in skills-based negotiation instruction;
  • Explore and test the application of new technologies to improve teaching and learning about negotiation; and
  • Help PON reach new audiences of negotiation practitioners and students through workshops, seminars, and other educational activities.
NP@PON is led by co-directors Larry Susskind and Michael Wheeler. For more information, please feel free to contact Michael Graskemper, at [email protected]


Negotiation Journal Welcomes Submissions on Teaching

Negotiation Journal (a quarterly peer-reviewed journal published by the Program on Negotiation with Blackwell Publishing) seeks teaching-related article submissions for its On Teaching section. Submissions on any aspect of teaching negotiation, mediation, or related topics are welcome. Teaching articles are typically 4,000 - 7,000 words in length. While they may be theoretical or practical in nature, they should be analytically rigorous and offer original insights, ideas, and/or research about teaching negotiation effectively. If you are considering submitting an article and are not a regular reader of the Journal, we strongly encourage you to review several recent issues to familiarize yourself generally with our content and style. All authors must also review Negotiation Journal author guidelines before submitting. The guidelines and information on how to submit articles can be found here.

 

About this Newsletter 
 
"Teaching Negotiation" is a biannual e-newsletter produced by NP@PON and circulated free of charge to negotiation and dispute resolution educators.  To access prior issues of this e-newsletter, please visit the "Teaching Negotiation" e-newsletter archive.

This newsletter or portions thereof may be reproduced at no charge for academic or nonprofit use only, so long as the NP@PON "Teaching Negotiation" e-newsletter is clearly identified as the source and so long as the author(s) of individual articles are acknowledged.  All copyrights are otherwise reserved.

You are invited to submit ideas and suggestions for future "Teaching Negotiation" e-newsletters.  Please submit suggestions to Michael Graskemper at [email protected] 

Join Our Mailing List