Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011

MGMT8647

Negotiation Behaviour

Summer School

2011

Personal Negotiation

NAME: Juan Sebastian Bernal

STUDENTNR: 2451113

DUE DATE: 28 February 2011

LECTURER: Mr. Alan Nelson

1
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011

Table of Contents

1. Introduction...................................................................................................3
2. The Negotiation Between Comcel and Movix..........................................3
2.1 Background................................................................................................................................................ 3

2.2 The Process.............................................................................................................................................. 4

3. Analyzing the process and achieving improvement..............................5

3.1 The strategy and Plan............................................................................................................................. 5

3.2 Knowing our limits and predicting other’s limits........................................................................6

3.3 The Agendas............................................................................................................................................... 6

3.4 Body language and Negotiation Style............................................................................................... 7

3.5 The Action Plan.......................................................................................................................................... 8

4. Conclusion....................................................................................................9

5. References..................................................................................................10

2
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011

1. Introduction

The Mobile Telecommunication industry in Colombia is comprised by three

competitors that require the products and services offered by a group of Value Added
Services Providers to fulfill the market demand of non-voice products (Comision de
Regulacion de Comunicaciones de Colombia, 2011). This paper presents the
negotiation process that I conducted in 2008 between Movix, a Value Added
Services provider with operation on five countries of the region, and Comcel the
major Mobile carrier in Colombia characterized by an aggressive negotiation style.
An analysis of the key elements of the negotiation is developed, highlighting the
critical moments and the different strategies used by the different participants.
Furthermore, different concepts and negotiation theories are used to compare and
contrast the behavior presented by the parties involved. The paper also aims to
revise and understand what as a negotiator I could have done differently to obtain the
desired outcome based on an action plan and the improvement of the different
negotiation skills.

2. The Negotiation Between Comcel and Movix

2.1 Background

The Mobile Phone Telecommunications market in Colombia is divided between three

participants. Comcel presents itself as the biggest carrier controlling more than 60%
of the market share, and two other carriers, Telefonica and Millicom, disputing the
remaining 40% of the market in a close distribution (Comision de Regulacion de
Comunicaciones de Colombia, 2011). These Mobile Phone companies offer a variety
of Value Added Services to their users, and to satisfy this demand they require the
input of a group of VAS Providers. With this scenario, where there are only three
clients, VAS providers need to guarantee their effectiveness in the negotiation
processes and the management of the commercial relationship to assure a long-term
continuance.

Movix is VAS provider with operation in five countries in South America, and between
2008 and 2009, I was the commercial manager for Colombia. When I started working

3
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
at the company, Movix had only signed contract with Millicom and was just about to
launch some of its products with this carrier. For that reason, the next steps were to
engage in negotiations with Comcel and Movistar putting Comcel as the priority due
to its position in the market. Comcel is also known to be the most difficult carrier to
negotiate with, and for the bad treatment they give to their providers. In 2007 I
worked for Comcel for about a year in the VAS department, which gave me the
benefit of a well established contact network and good relationships with the
management team. Movix’s general manager (Ricardo Morales) had as well a very
good contact network inside Comcel, which was also helpful to obtain the opportunity
to offer our services.

2.2 The Process

In June of 2008 I approached Oscar Delgado, Comcel's VAS manager to start the
negotiation process. This process was held on a series of meetings due to the
various details that were required to be addressed. As previously mentioned,
Comcel's VAS management team had a reputation for abuse of power and
mistreatment of employees and providers.

It is important to mention that Comcel, as a filial of the America Movil group, has to
follow certain parameters such as the revenue share distribution, meaning that this
crucial point is out of discussion. For that reason, the negotiation points were
centered on marketing, carrier’s support, exclusivity messaging policies and some
other secondary points. Our goal was firstly to sign the contract and to connect our
servers with Comcel’s, from then we can negotiate the secondary items.

Our first reunion was in Oscar’s office sitting in front of his office desk and his
opening statement was “At the moment we don’t need any more providers, we are
here just because we know you and my boss and she asked me to include you as
providers”. This opening statement created an environment of stress and hostility
from his behalf and put us in a defensive position. From that point on we worked on
showing him the valuable products what we were able to offer the company and that
he actually needed us due to a specific product that no other provider had. As a
commercial strategy we invited Oscar to go out for lunch to reduce the stress and put
the negotiation process in a different scenario where both parts could feel in the
same position, trying to level up a little. This strategy helped to release some of the
tension that we were having and to create a more collaborative environment.

4
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
At the same time we also approached Monica Quiñones (VAS Director) Oscar’s boss
trying to obtain a better deal by going to the source. By doing this we were able to
accelerate the contract process, but this action was not well received by Oscar
making him feel disrespected. The reunion with Monica was held on her office, and it
went smoother due that her attitude was more open to listen to new proposals.
Furthermore, her body language was open and we sat down on a meeting round
table. After the contract was signed we proceeded to connect our servers with
Comcel’s, and more important to negotiate the service’s promotion and
communication details. In the VAS industry it is necessary to count with the carriers
support to promote your services and products, and the way it is done is through
mass SMS delivered by the carrier to its users (broadcast). As a corporate policy
Comcel does not send broadcast SMS to their users unless it is for a voice product or
a white brand VAS product. On our behalf we had a competitive advantage due to a
multimedia product developed by Movix that up to that point was unique in the
market. To obtain Comcel’s support we were willing to invest a specific amount of
money to advertise our products on traditional mass media using the carrier’s brand.
The objective was to show them that the company was committed to Comcel, and
more important to demonstrate our confidence in our own products.

Comcel management (Monica) was opened to consider giving us some support after
we put the offer on the table. Finally, we could not agreed on the conditions regarding
the broadcast because Comcel’s demands exceeded our possibilities, and according
to our projections recovering the investment was highly improbable. Until this point in
time Movix has not been able to accomplish an agreement regarding the broadcast
and the advertising investment offer.

3. Analysing the process and achieving improvement

3.1 The strategy and Plan

Strategy is crucial in any negotiation process in order to obtain the desired results
(Nelson, 2011; Lewicki et al, 2007). Particularly, in this negotiation process we
engaged by managing the situation as a cold sale, by this I mean we did not prepare
before hand to engage with a clear knowledge of our counterpart (Lax & Sebenius,
1986). We new the individuals from previous interactions on a different scenario,
which make us believe that they would react positively, omitting their needs and

5
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
concerns. According to the dual model it is equally important to understand the
counter part needs as our own (Pruitt, 1983, 1981). Furthermore, it is also necessary
to understand the importance of the outcome VS the importance of the relationship,
which in this case is the base of the business were with 3 possible clients Movix can’t
afford not to have long-term good relationships (Lewicki et al, 1996; Fisher 1991). A
good approach could have been to research what are Oscar’s goals, and to try to
help him achieve does goals with our products. Basically is to become attractive for
Comcel to negotiate with Movix in a collaborative scenario.

3.2 Knowing our limits and predicting other’s limits

I believe this was one of the points were I strongly failed, I did not know what was our
BATNA until half way through the negotiation process (Fells, 2010). On the other
side, we placed an offer on the table without previous preparation and on the spot.
By doing this we landed in a terrain where we did not know how to proceed or how
far we could go (Nelson, 2011: Lewicki et al, 2007). This action could have been
caused by desperation and anxiety due to the relevance of the Comcel, we wanted to
close the deal so much that we showed that and Comcel tried to used it for their
benefit. As Nelson Mentioned if you loose it you lost it (2010).

Looking at the process now, the outcome could have been better just by stepping
down from the table to further prepare the proposal offering with all the details and
required information. By doing this we could have engage on an open negotiation
trying to achieve profitability for both parts, and actually achieving a ZOPA. The
previous scenario goes along with managing the agenda, necessary not to loose
control of the process (Forester, 2004; Lewicki et al, 2007).

3.3 The Agendas

During the negotiation I believed we were capable to manage the agenda during an
important part of the process, until we lost control when we placed the advertising
proposal as previously mentioned. Coming back to the first period, we moved the
negotiation to a neutral ground with Oscar, and engage with Monica when we
believed in was necessary in order to achieve the first part of our established goals.

6
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
- Movix Operating and Hidden Agendas: looking back at the process now I can
identify what we intuitively had as agendas. Movix’s operating agenda was
comprised by some specific targets such as: Signing the contract, connecting
our servers and providing our products and services. On the other hand our
hidden agenda was to obtain the Comcel’s support regarding promoting the
products through broadcast.

- Comcel’s Operating and Hidden Agendas: It is more difficult to try to identify

the Carriers operating agenda due that we were the ones who approached
them. It could probably be to select the products and services that can better
satisfy their demand, and to select the providers that have been proven as
effective and successful. On the other hand, the hidden agenda can be
identified due to Comcel’s bad reputation regarding the way Comcel mistreat
their providers. Basically the carrier tries to reduce the provider’s revenue as
much as possible and makes them carry all the financial risks.

By acknowledging the operating agendas negotiators can achieve better

outcomes (Fells, 2010; Pruitt, 1983). Researching and asking the appropriate
questions becomes essential in a negotiation with the purpose of understanding
what the counterpart really wants (Nelson, 2011; Rackham & Carlisle, 1978). If I
have had this understanding of the process at that time I would have approached
the negotiation in a different way. The strategy would have been based on
making Comcel get interested in Movix’s products, giving us a better position.
Furthermore, this approach would have also contra-rested Comcel’s hidden
agenda allowing a collaborative approach creating value for both companies
(Rognes & Schei, 2008).

3.4 Body language and Negotiation Style

The Negotiation team from Comcel was comprised by two individuals with a very
different negotiation styles and body language. Firstly we engage With Oscar
Delgado with an aggressive negotiation style based on intimidation, use of irritators
and seeking an individualistic outcome (Nelson, 2011; Pease & Pease, 2006).
Oscar’s body language was closed, and the way he sated on the chair aimed to

7
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
intimidate the counterpart. Sometimes it was evident that his behavior made him feel
powerful by the way he talked and sat, he laid back on his chair, and on repeated
occasions he put his hands behind hi head. The second person involved was
Monica presenting a more collaborative approach and aiming to find a win – win
outcome. Her style was more reasonable, open and integrative, which translates into
a more pleasant and productive process (Nelson, 2011; Pease & Pease, 2006).
Monica’s body language sent a positive message based on eye contact and an open
position. Her voice tone was generally pleasant and calm, probably obtained from
many years of experience. During the negotiation process the highest achievements
were obtained with her involvement. When we started the negotiation we were
directed to negotiate with Oscar, resulting in a longer process. The learning outcome
relates to pick the person you will negotiate with, which in the majority of the cases is
out of your scope. In this particular case we could have tried to carry out the entire
process with Monica avoiding the rough patches we had with Oscar.

Analyzing my self is a bigger challenge because at that point in time I was not aware
of my own non-verbal communication. Y considered that I posses good commercial
skills that is most probably accompanied by a well-managed body language. I believe
this is one of my strong points when engaging on negotiation.

- The location: It is important to carry the negotiations in a place where both

parts feel secure and comfortable (Nelson, 2011; Pease & Pease, 2006). In
some cases it is difficult to achieve this objective, even more when the
negotiation involves a counter part that stands on a position of power due to
its size of relevance for you such as in the case in mention. Even this, we
were able, for some sessions, to negotiate in a neutral ground after realizing
that the first meetings were being affected by this factor.

3.5 The Action Plan

Working as a commercial manager requires from me to be a skillful negotiator. The

action plan for me is to be prepared for future negotiations because I wont be able to
reengage in this one, as I am not part of the company anymore. For this reason, it is
important to acknowledge the steps and items that are part of a strategic negotiation:
Determine issues and objectives, Research, understanding the different points of
view, choosing a position, understanding other’s and own needs, strategy and

8
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
response (Fells, 2010; Lewicki et al, 2007; Allred, 2000). The points that have the
biggest space for improvement are the strategy, research and mainly to consciously
prepare the case before sitting down in a negotiation table. This is a long learning
process gained from experience, self-analysis, dedication and understanding of the
different models and best practices.

4. Conclusion

In 2008, and as a commercial manager for Movix a Value Added Services provider
for Mobile Telecommunication Companies, I conducted the negotiation process with
Comcel, the biggest mobile carrier in Colombia. During the process a series of
negotiations meetings where held on different scenarios and involving different
negotiators from Comcel. I was able to analyze some of the most important aspects
of the process comparing and contrasting them against the concepts from the
negotiation behavior theory such as strategy, body language, negotiation style, the
agendas, Batnas and Zopa. During the negotiation I was also able to engage with
two individuals with different negotiation styles, one characterized by being
aggressive, the other more reasonable and integrative, and how I confronted the
situation. Furthermore, the analysis performed presented how the negotiation could
have gone, more specifically how it could have gone better, by applying some of the
theory to the case, and realized the specific points for improvement as a negotiator. It
is really stated that by understanding and applying the mentioned concepts the
outcome will most probably be a better one. Finally a plan comprised by seven items
was presented with the objective to identify the necessary steps to take in further
negotiations based of self-awareness, strategy and preparation.

9
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
5. References

 Allred, KG 2000, ‘Distinguishing Best and Strategic Practices: A Framework for

Managing the Dilemma between Creating and Claiming Value’, Negotiation Journal,
vol. 16, pp. 387 – 397. Available from: Proquest. [23 January 2011].

 FELLS, R 2010, Effective negotiation: from research to results, Cambridge

University Press, Australia

 Fells, R.E (2000a) ‘Negotiating ‘strategically” in travaglione, A and Marshall, V.

(eds) Human Resource Srategies: An Applied Approach Sydney, McGraw-Hill, pp.
81-116.

 Fisher, R, Ury, W & Patton, B 1991, Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without
giving in, New York: Penguin Books.

 Flores, F & Solomon, R 1998, ‘Trust, Business and Business Ethics’, Business
Ethics Quarterly Journal, Vol.8, No.2, Available from Proquest [13 January 2011].

 Forester, J 2004, ‘Responding to Critical Moments with Humor, Recognition, and

Hope’, Negotiation Journal, pp 221 – 238. Available from: Proquest. [24 January
2011].

 Kennedy, G 2007, Strategic negotiation: an opportunity for change, Ashgate

Publishing Company, Hampshire.

 Kim, P & Fragale, A 2005, 'Choosing the path to bargaining power: An empirical
comparison of BATNAs and contributions in negotiation', Journal of Applied
Psychology, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 373-381. Available from: Proquest. [24 January
2011].
 Lax D A and Sebenius JK (1986) ‘The Manager as a Negotiator’, New York, Free
Press.

 Lewicki, J, Barry, B & Saunders, D 2010, Negotiation, MacGraw-Hill, New York.

 Lewicki, R, Saunders, D, Minton, J, Roy, J & Lewicki, N 2007, Essentials of

negotiation, McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

10
 Negotiation Behavior Personal Negotiation 2011
 Nelson, A. 2011, ‘Negotiation Behaviour’, Lecture Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. MGMT8647,
UWA Perth.

 Putnam, LL 1990, ‘Reframing Integrative and Distributive Bargaining: A Process

Perspective’, Research on Negotiation in Organizations, vol. 2, pp. 3 – 30. Available
from: Proquest. [23 January 2011].

 Pruitt, DG 1983, ‘Strategic Choice in Negotiation’ American Behavioral Scientists 27

(2) pp. 167-194.

 Rackham N & Carlisle J (1978)’ The effective Negotiator Parts 1 and 2’,
Journal of European Industrial Training Part 1:2(6), Part 2:2(7).

 Ribeiro-Soriano, D & Urbano, D 2009, ‘Overview of Collaborative Entrepreneurship:

An Integrated Approach Between Business Decisions and Negotiations’ Group
Decision and Negotiation, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 419 – 431. Available from: Proquest.
[21 January 2011].

 Rognes, JK & Schei, V 2008 ‘Understanding the integrative approach to conflict

management’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol 25, No 1, pp 82 – 97.
Available from: Proquest. [21 January 2011].

11