Reflection Paper 2

ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION FORM
This will be the first page of your assignment
Course Name: NEG1

Assignment Title: Reflection Paper
Submitted by: Harsh Desai
(Student name or group name)
Student Name PG ID
Harsh Desai 62410759
ISB Honour Code

 I will represent myself in a truthful manner.
 I will not fabricate or plagiarise any information with regard to the curriculum.
 I will not seek, receive or obtain an unfair advantage over other students.
 I will not be a party to any violation of the ISB Honour Code.
 I will personally uphold and abide, in theory and practice, the values, purpose and rules of
the ISB Honour Code.
 I will report all violations of the ISB Honour Code by members of the ISB community.
 I will respect the rights and property of all in the ISB community.
 I will abide by all the rules and regulations that are prescribed by ISB.
(Please start writing your assignment below)
Reflection Paper on Negotiation Learnings

a.
My understanding of negotiation evolved significantly when faced with

multi-party and high-stakes settings, such as those in Harborco and The
Gas Station Game. Initially, I perceived negotiation as a bilateral, give-
and-take process. However, I now appreciate the layered dynamics of
multi-party negotiations, where coalitions, competing interests, and
strategic alliances play crucial roles.
In Harborco, the necessity to secure support from multiple stakeholders

with divergent interests made it clear that negotiation in complex settings
demands flexibility and adaptability. This exercise taught me the
importance of understanding both shared and unshared information
among parties, as well as how to leverage these insights to form alliances
or strategically influence outcomes. I learned that positioning my proposal
early in such a setting could create an anchor, aligning other parties’
perspectives with my goals—a tactic that leverages both anchoring and
conformity pressures.
In The Gas Station Game, where competitive dynamics required

continuous adaptation, I observed the effects of strategic reciprocity in
negotiations. This game taught me the importance of balancing
cooperation and competition in repeated interactions, aligning with
Axelrod’s Tit-for-Tat strategy of initial cooperation followed by
reciprocal actions. It highlighted how building trust and signalling
cooperative intent can prevent a destructive cycle of retaliation, which is
crucial in real-world scenarios with ongoing relationships.
b.
Through these exercises, I recognized my strengths in analytical

preparation and coalition-building. In Harborco, I meticulously
analysed each party’s scoring system and interests, which allowed me to
identify potential coalition partners based on mutual benefits. This
strategic approach helped me secure alliances with parties whose
priorities aligned closely with my objectives, a critical move in a multi-
party negotiation setting where unilateral power is limited. This exercise
reinforced my ability to efficiently evaluate complex trade-offs and
manage competing interests.
However, a key area for improvement emerged: my tendency to overlook

the emotional and relational aspects in my focus on maximizing
quantitative outcomes. In multi-party negotiations, managing
relationships and acknowledging each party’s perspectives are as
important as achieving one’s own objectives. For example, during The Gas
Station Game, I initially focused solely on maximizing my station’s profits,
which inadvertently led to a cycle of price cuts with competitors. This
experience underscored the need to balance profit-maximization with
relationship management and highlighted that sustainable negotiation
outcomes often require cooperation over competition.
c.
My background in data-driven environments has shaped my analytical

approach, which is advantageous in quantitative negotiations, such as
calculating scoring metrics in Harborco. However, I discovered the
limitations of this approach when dealing with multi-dimensional issues
where relationships and perceptions matter as much as hard data. For
instance, in Harborco, a rigid data-focused approach would have hindered
my ability to empathize with environmental and labor representatives,
whose concerns were rooted in values rather than numbers.
Recognizing this, I adopted a more collaborative mindset,

acknowledging that each party’s interests and values could contribute to a
more integrative outcome. This change in perspective allowed me to
negotiate with the environmental and labor unions more effectively by
understanding their core concerns and proposing compromise solutions,
which helped build trust and fostered mutual respect among all parties
involved.
d.
Through these exercises, I gained insights into behavioral patterns, such

as conformity pressures and coalition dynamics. In multi-party
negotiations, I observed that people are often influenced by early
advocates, which can set the tone and direction for the entire group. This
was evident in Harborco, where the first proposal received considerable
attention and shaped subsequent discussions. This experience reinforced
the power of being the “first advocate” and the importance of clear,
structured proposals to sway opinions and gain early support.
Furthermore, I observed that coalition-building is not merely a matter of

aligning with those who share similar goals; it also requires understanding
the dynamics of coalitional integrity and managing group identities
effectively. By forming coalitions early and promoting a sense of shared
identity, I found that I could strengthen alliances and create a robust
support network. The experience taught me that in multiparty settings,
individual power is often secondary to coalition power, making it essential
to build and nurture alliances.
e.
The exercises offered invaluable insights into how academic theories
apply in real-world negotiations. For instance, learning about alternative
dispute resolution (ADR) in class helped me approach negotiations with
a greater focus on preserving relationships and achieving integrative
outcomes rather than solely competing for value. At Harborco, I applied
ADR principles by focusing on interest-based bargaining rather than
positional bargaining, which encouraged all parties to develop solutions
that met their core interests collaboratively. This approach minimized
conflict and increased the likelihood of a lasting agreement, aligning with
the principle that ADR methods often result in lower transaction costs and
greater mutual satisfaction.
Moreover, the importance of process design in multi-party negotiations

became evident, particularly the choice between unanimity and
majority voting. I learned that while majority voting can expedite
decisions, it often fails to capture the strength of individual preferences
and may damage relationships if certain parties feel marginalized. This
insight will be invaluable in future negotiations where I might advocate for
decision-making processes that balance efficiency with inclusivity to
maintain strong, positive relationships among stakeholders.

Reflection Paper 2

Uploaded by

Reflection Paper 2

Uploaded by

ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION FORM

This will be the first page of your assignment

Course Name: NEG1

(Student name or group name)

ISB Honour Code

(Please start writing your assignment below)

Reflection Paper on Negotiation Learnings

My understanding of negotiation evolved significantly when faced with

In Harborco, the necessity to secure support from multiple stakeholders

In The Gas Station Game, where competitive dynamics required

Through these exercises, I recognized my strengths in analytical

However, a key area for improvement emerged: my tendency to overlook

My background in data-driven environments has shaped my analytical

Recognizing this, I adopted a more collaborative mindset,

Through these exercises, I gained insights into behavioral patterns, such

Furthermore, I observed that coalition-building is not merely a matter of

Moreover, the importance of process design in multi-party negotiations

You might also like