Pre-Negotiation Plan for Federated Science Fund (Role of

Turbo Enterprises)
Justine Mensik
October 5, 2014

1
Summary of Negotiation
The participants in the negotiation are Stockman, Turbo and United, three small
firms that produce specialized products, equipment and research for scientific and
medical communities. In this situation, the Federated Science Fund, a government
agency that funds research in advanced medical technology, has indicated willingness to
provide funding for research and development projects. My company, Turbo Enterprises,
has recently applied for research and development funding alongside the two other
companies.
Issues
In this situation, the main issue to be negotiated is who I will agree on a particular
consortium with, since that will determine the total amount to be awarded us. Second, I
must negotiate with the other party(s) as to how much of the money I will receive. It
would be most equitable to split the money equally with the other party(s) involved in the
selected consortium. However, it would benefit me to potentially argue for more of the
share. Turbo is at the cusp of medical breakthroughs, and more money could potentially
push us over the edge. There are three possible arrangements, and I have ordered them
from most desirable to least desirable. My order of the consortiums is arranged based on
Turbo receiving the most funding possible to Turbo receiving the minimum amount of
funding. First, I can agree on an arrangement with Stockman, in which we will somehow
divide $440,000. Second, I can agree on an arrangement in which all three firms will
somehow divide $480,000. Third, I can agree on an arrangement with United, in which
we will somehow divide $300,000. I decided on this order after determining my
Pre-Negotiation Plan for Federated Science Fund (Role of
Turbo Enterprises)
Justine Mensik
October 5, 2014

2
negotiation goal, which is for Turbo to receive the maximum amount of funding.
This is the first step in the planning process. The other two institutions have different
issues to concern themselves with. Stockman is concentrated on basic research, with a
wide variety of products. With more money, they could potentially broaden the number
of products theyre researching, which means a greater share of market share.
Additionally, this firm can argue that they contribute the most value to any consortium
agreement. United is concentrated on AIDS-related research. With their focus directed on
one particular issue, the more money they negotiate for, the more money strictly devoted
to research and treatment of this worldwide epidemic. Additionally, United could argue
their need for more money based on high future productivity and potential. In this
negotiation, my overall approach will be a moderate one, and I will be willing to
make some concessions in terms of the exact dollar amount I will receive. I believe
that if I approach one or both of these firms with an air of flexibility and agreeableness,
we can agree on a mutually beneficial division of the funding. I dont want to approach
the firms with hostility or belligerence, because then neither of them will be willing to
hear my arguments or negotiate a beneficial consortium. However, it is important to my
firm that we receive this money for our cancer research. I dont want to give any
indication that my research is any less important or pertinent in the scientific and medical
communities. I would convey this nonverbally by sitting with arms uncrossed (so as not
to appear cold or closed-off), making solid eye contact (to indicate confidence and
firmness). Additionally, I will refrain from raising my voice and yelling. However, I will
speak with confidence and firmness.
Pre-Negotiation Plan for Federated Science Fund (Role of
Turbo Enterprises)
Justine Mensik
October 5, 2014

3
Bargaining Range
For this negotiation, my BATNA would be to seek private funding in order to
further develop my cancer-related technologies. Since Turbo has a reputation for
producing steady output and reliable products, I could present Turbo as a solid
investment to private hospitals that are focused on cancer treatment and prevention.
While this funding from the Federated Science Fund would be easier to come by, I cannot
accept meager funding because Stockman and or United are unwilling to compromise and
make concessions. I believe that this BATNA is a strong one, and will give me enough
control in order to achieve my goal of maximum funding for Turbo. I have set my
target point at $220,000, which is the maximum possible funding Turbo can receive in a
consortium with Stockman. I have set my reservation point at $150,000, which is an
equal split of funding with United in that particular consortium agreement. In setting
these points, I am attempting to create a larger bargaining range for the negotiation
to take place in. This will create more distance between my target and resistance points,
and the settlement point will ideally be a point lying closer to my target.
Problems & Planning
One potential problem in this negotiation could be the attitude of one or both of
the other firms. Either or both of them could see their contributions to the scientific and
medical fields as the most important and beneficial, and will therefore be resistant to
making concessions in terms of an exact dollar amount. Additionally, there is the
possibility that United and Stockman have negotiated a deal without me, and would
therefore cut me out of receiving any funding from the FSF. In order to counteract these
Pre-Negotiation Plan for Federated Science Fund (Role of
Turbo Enterprises)
Justine Mensik
October 5, 2014

4
issues, I will remain moderate and cooperative in my negotiating strategy. I will not
let an agreement fall through if it is a matter of a few thousand dollars, and will be
willing to give the other party that amount in order to make a deal. Additionally, I will
approach the negotiation with specific research proving that my contributions are highly
valuable. This would be quantifiable data, such as the number of patients who have
received treatment due to Turbos innovative cancer technologies, and the number of
patients who have gone into remission due to technology produced by Turbo. In order to
understand the positions of the other two firms, I would ask: 1) Do you have specific
projects requiring this funding? 2) How effective has your technology and/or projects
been in the past? 3) What are the timelines of your most important projects, and how
pertinent is it that you receive this funding now?
Conflict Strategies
Per the Dual Concerns Model, I will adopt a more competitive approach for this
negotiation. I have a stronger interest in achieving both substantive outcomes (receiving
funding for my cancer research and projects), and am not as concerned with building
relationships with the other firms. I want to be firm with my goals, so as to show that I
have control and will not be short-changed. However, I dont want to come across as
belligerent, because I have to come to some form of an agreement with one or both of the
other firms. I believe both of the other firms will also approach this negotiation with a
competitive mindset, because they both will feel strongly about their contributions to
science and or medicine. It is likely that both firms will only give up so much, because
they feel their research is pertinent and critical. Additionally, since each of the firms
Pre-Negotiation Plan for Federated Science Fund (Role of
Turbo Enterprises)
Justine Mensik
October 5, 2014

5
focus on different research areas, its not necessarily important that each of the firms
maintain a relationship. Its not incredibly likely that the firms will work together
frequently.