Benchmark Negotiation Techniques
Find a situation (a real-world situation or a fictional situation) with two or more parties of jurisdiction or interest over a specific project or policy (public/private partnership, intergovernmental). At least one of the parties needs to be a governing board or elected officials.
In 750-1,000 words, do the following:
- Explain the participants in the situation. (power involved, interest, requirement)
- Explain the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties.
- Recommend strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation (at least one of the parties needs to be elected officials or a governing board)
- Recommend different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get their interest or requirements met.
- Discuss how each party determines the value of what they are negotiating for and what they are willing to give up.
- Discuss what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation or leave the table (how much leverage does each party have).
Use two to three scholarly resources to support your explanations.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies: 2.4: Recommend strategies for negotiating various agreements; 3.4: Recommend strategies to build relationships and advocate with elected or governing board officials.
Rubric
Attempt Start Date: 02-May-2019 at 12:00:00 AM
Due Date: 08-May-2019 at 11:59:59 PM
Maximum Points: 100.0
0Files BROWSE FROM MY COMPUTER More options for File Upload
© 2019 BNED LoudCloud LLC
- Terms & Conditions |
- Privacy Policy |
- Tech Support
[ Ver: 5.4.1-865 ]
In the lecture the professor gave us these notes.
For section three:
1) section three should lead into section four.
2) Section four must mention BATNA: Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement
3) Pick 2-3 negotiation tactics and how they relate to the scenario.
4) Don’t do section 5 and 6 as is. Discuss more about how much each party has and how much leverage they have.
Rubic_Print_Format
| Course Code | Class Code | |||||||
| ADM-560 | ADM-560-XC0823W5 | Benchmark – Negotiation Techniques | 100.0 | |||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% | |||||||
| Explain the participants in the situation. | 10.0% | Explanation of participants in the situation is missing. | Explanation of participants in the situation is vague and inconsistent. | Explanation of participants in the situation is present. | Explanation of participants in the situation is present and clear. | Explanation of participants in the situation is clear and concise. | ||
| Explain the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties. | 10.0% | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is missing. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is vague and inconsistent. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is present and connected to some research. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is present, clear, and connected to research. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is clear, concise, and connected to research. | ||
| Recommend strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation. (comp. 3.4) | 15.0% | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is missing. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is vague and inconsistent. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is present and connected to some research. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is present, clear, and connected to research. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is clear, concise, and connected to research. | ||
| Recommend different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met. (comp 2.4) | 15.0% | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is missing. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is vague and inconsistent. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is present and connected to some research. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is present, clear, and connected to research. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is clear, concise, and connected to research. | ||
| Discuss how each party determines the value of their negotiation. | 10.0% | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is missing. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is vague and inconsistent. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is present. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is present and clear. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is clear and concise. | ||
| Discuss what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation. | 10.0% | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is missing. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is vague and inconsistent. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is present. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is present and clear. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is clear and concise. | ||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% | |||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | ||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | ||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | ||
| Format | 10.0% | |||||||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | ||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | ||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"
