A rather uncomfortable decisioin to make for this life threatening dilemma in which all patients in need of the dialysis machine, and that no matter what decision made, someone will be left behind to die. All deserved it, but only 1 can have it. What a difficult dillema to be put in. Using process of elimination was hard enough, but when Laura Ellen, Amy and I tried to discuss our priortizing by values that too became complicated. Laura Ellen had an interesting view point, by pointing out the social impact, which helped her categorize them. Amy and I took more of the urgency standpoint, in our stance. We all agreed that all are very important and truly in the "real world" we would be stumped by this decision. This form of socialized medicine was hard enough, but Dr. Strange performed as each patient, it got harder. Each patient, of course, ended up only having two weeks to live. Dr. Strange did a good job, acting as each patient! This particular negotiation reminded of the illustration used by Team Building excercise. Where upon deciding the group of people that go on the lifeboat. It is a similar method of deciding who can get on the lifeboat, and how the teams came to that conclusion, based upon each person's critical skills, ect...
It was an interesting negotiation.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Negotiation #4 People v. Malvenue
I was the district attorney in this negotiation! Mr. Malvenue was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon against my client, Mrs. Malevenue. Despite the fact that Mrs. Malvenue has refuesed to sign a complaint against her husband, she is still afraid of repeated behavior. As her attorney it is my duty to make sure he does is intimidated by a stricter sentence and or punishment.
Scott acting as Mr. Malvenue's defense attorney and I have begun our negotiation.
Scott asks if my client has signed the paper to press charges. I did not know which information he had and playing it safe, I said i could won't give that information.
I asked if Mr. Malevnue had pleaded guilty, that threw Scott off a bit, and he re-read and said "no". He said she "fell" from an accident and ended up with bruises.
Scott asked if it were ok to start plea bargaining to which we agreed quickly.
I asked for his suggestions.
Scott made it clear he didn't want his client to go to jail, and could we arrange for counseling and community time.
I knew I was going to have to play this cool and some how incorporate counseling and community time, but I wasn't letting him get off on prison, but not going too hard, because I was too swamped for another case. Scott was biting at the bait pretty good here and not putting up too much of a struggle for me.
I threw out that the law states that if a man abuses his wife, regardless of if she presses charges ( which I really don't know the laws-but was bluffing my way thru this) ...ect..
Scott getting nervous jumps in and reminds me that Mrs. Malvenue did not press charges , so therefore; he won't go to jail...ect..she wants him back and loves him.
I reminded him that not only was Mrs. Malvenue jeapordized, but her son was at a high risk and the judge would be in favor of Mr. Malvenue spending much more time in prison.
Scott persists and tells me that if it does go to jail the only evidence of a witness was a neighbor.
I agreed to that statement, but alerted Scott that when Mrs. Malvenue goes for her own counseling she will probably leave her husband anyhow, after realizing he is scum, and she won't let her husband see her or the kids...
I asked how much time did he think was unreasonable or what time limit was he thinking about it as far as prison time. No more than 2 years with community time and counseling, it would need to be a short sentence.( wow! 2 years...i was doing good with this negotiation, at this point and knew I could get a shorter one and get this over with very quickly). I counter-offered with 1 year and 3 months, plus 1 year of community counseling, with community work involved.
We made our agreement rather quickly and pleasantly enough I did not go to court and was happy that Mr. Malvenue was going to be involved in counseling. I was happy at that outcome.
My negotiations have gone very quickly and I think I learned from the others and applied some of what I learned to this negotiation. I waited, listened and didn't jump at the first offer or put my offer out there. I wanted to gather some information first to collect as much valuable facts to build my case upon. It seemed that Scott was doing the much of the same strategy as me, not giving too much information, and perhaps giving too little for fear of losing what we needed to gain in the negotiation as well.
In retrospect, since I am learning to negotiate, I think I asked the right questions to gather my information, but still very vague as to what kind of creative questions will get me the right answer. I would like to build upon that.
Scott acting as Mr. Malvenue's defense attorney and I have begun our negotiation.
Scott asks if my client has signed the paper to press charges. I did not know which information he had and playing it safe, I said i could won't give that information.
I asked if Mr. Malevnue had pleaded guilty, that threw Scott off a bit, and he re-read and said "no". He said she "fell" from an accident and ended up with bruises.
Scott asked if it were ok to start plea bargaining to which we agreed quickly.
I asked for his suggestions.
Scott made it clear he didn't want his client to go to jail, and could we arrange for counseling and community time.
I knew I was going to have to play this cool and some how incorporate counseling and community time, but I wasn't letting him get off on prison, but not going too hard, because I was too swamped for another case. Scott was biting at the bait pretty good here and not putting up too much of a struggle for me.
I threw out that the law states that if a man abuses his wife, regardless of if she presses charges ( which I really don't know the laws-but was bluffing my way thru this) ...ect..
Scott getting nervous jumps in and reminds me that Mrs. Malvenue did not press charges , so therefore; he won't go to jail...ect..she wants him back and loves him.
I reminded him that not only was Mrs. Malvenue jeapordized, but her son was at a high risk and the judge would be in favor of Mr. Malvenue spending much more time in prison.
Scott persists and tells me that if it does go to jail the only evidence of a witness was a neighbor.
I agreed to that statement, but alerted Scott that when Mrs. Malvenue goes for her own counseling she will probably leave her husband anyhow, after realizing he is scum, and she won't let her husband see her or the kids...
I asked how much time did he think was unreasonable or what time limit was he thinking about it as far as prison time. No more than 2 years with community time and counseling, it would need to be a short sentence.( wow! 2 years...i was doing good with this negotiation, at this point and knew I could get a shorter one and get this over with very quickly). I counter-offered with 1 year and 3 months, plus 1 year of community counseling, with community work involved.
We made our agreement rather quickly and pleasantly enough I did not go to court and was happy that Mr. Malvenue was going to be involved in counseling. I was happy at that outcome.
My negotiations have gone very quickly and I think I learned from the others and applied some of what I learned to this negotiation. I waited, listened and didn't jump at the first offer or put my offer out there. I wanted to gather some information first to collect as much valuable facts to build my case upon. It seemed that Scott was doing the much of the same strategy as me, not giving too much information, and perhaps giving too little for fear of losing what we needed to gain in the negotiation as well.
In retrospect, since I am learning to negotiate, I think I asked the right questions to gather my information, but still very vague as to what kind of creative questions will get me the right answer. I would like to build upon that.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Negotiation #1 "Appleton V. Baker"
I represented the Appletons and Natalie played the part of the Bakers. This was my first negotiation. In my role as Mr. Appleton, I am required to pursuade Mr. Baker (buyer) into buying Lot 42, which is a half spare lot. The lot really has no value because it is not rebuildable. I am not happy with the $5,000 dollars that a different buyer has offered me, I would rather try to sell it to the Baker's for $7,000 or more to get my money's worth back.
Since this was my first negotiation, I had no particular stategy or technique to apply here.
Natalie was amiable and interested in the offer of Lot 42.
I dove in right away and put the price up front without finding out value of importance of the land to my neighbor. I think one reason was in fear of not being able to sell this awkard piece of land to them, so I wanted to settle it quickly.
To my suprise she took the $7,000 dollars I fairly offered. I then thought to myself as she settled so quickly (with a big smile on her face) that I overlooked some valuable research in this conversation.
I learned that Natalie ( Mr. Baker) was willing to pay up to $20,000 ( I do believe- my memory fails me at times). She laughed and I felt silly for not forseeing that!
I learned to try not to set the price so quickly and find out how the value of the property, or whatever it is means to the buyer. This will give help me with a starting price and perhaps propose a good time for the buyer to offer up a $ figure for me to work with.
The outcome being I (Mr. Appleton), the seller, very happy at breaking even of $7,000 of what I paid for it, and Mr.Baker happy for buying the lot, as he intended to add a sunroom on to it and he will now own it, with no fears of strange people close to his property. We were pretty happy with the deal, but it was a good learning experience for me. I believe Natalie did good with her analysis of her negotiation from what I could tell.
Since this was my first negotiation, I had no particular stategy or technique to apply here.
Natalie was amiable and interested in the offer of Lot 42.
I dove in right away and put the price up front without finding out value of importance of the land to my neighbor. I think one reason was in fear of not being able to sell this awkard piece of land to them, so I wanted to settle it quickly.
To my suprise she took the $7,000 dollars I fairly offered. I then thought to myself as she settled so quickly (with a big smile on her face) that I overlooked some valuable research in this conversation.
I learned that Natalie ( Mr. Baker) was willing to pay up to $20,000 ( I do believe- my memory fails me at times). She laughed and I felt silly for not forseeing that!
I learned to try not to set the price so quickly and find out how the value of the property, or whatever it is means to the buyer. This will give help me with a starting price and perhaps propose a good time for the buyer to offer up a $ figure for me to work with.
The outcome being I (Mr. Appleton), the seller, very happy at breaking even of $7,000 of what I paid for it, and Mr.Baker happy for buying the lot, as he intended to add a sunroom on to it and he will now own it, with no fears of strange people close to his property. We were pretty happy with the deal, but it was a good learning experience for me. I believe Natalie did good with her analysis of her negotiation from what I could tell.
Negotiation #2 "The Blender"
I happened to be the Complaints and Return Clerk for a large dept store. The Customer (Scott)
approached me informing me that he had recently bought a blender at our dept store, and it was deficient. Scott wants to return his blender. Scott had three strikes against him regarding getting a refund back. 1. He was carrying it back to me "out of the box". 2. It was broken now and can't be resold 3. His reciept was past 10 days past- which policy is up to 7 days to return for a full refund. We sat silent for a few minutes not sure of what position to take next! Scott suggested that he swap out his broke Blender for the display item. I am not sure now what happened to that suggestion, but I had made a suggestion that I write the manufacturer on behalf of my customer. They can send him a new one and he will keep the blender. If that doesn't work, he can come back to the store and we can decide what to do then.
I thought this negotiation went very well and we each had a suggestion that suited each of our needs and dilemma. My customer was complaint and polite, much different than what had been stated on my paper, so I was happy with that.
approached me informing me that he had recently bought a blender at our dept store, and it was deficient. Scott wants to return his blender. Scott had three strikes against him regarding getting a refund back. 1. He was carrying it back to me "out of the box". 2. It was broken now and can't be resold 3. His reciept was past 10 days past- which policy is up to 7 days to return for a full refund. We sat silent for a few minutes not sure of what position to take next! Scott suggested that he swap out his broke Blender for the display item. I am not sure now what happened to that suggestion, but I had made a suggestion that I write the manufacturer on behalf of my customer. They can send him a new one and he will keep the blender. If that doesn't work, he can come back to the store and we can decide what to do then.
I thought this negotiation went very well and we each had a suggestion that suited each of our needs and dilemma. My customer was complaint and polite, much different than what had been stated on my paper, so I was happy with that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)