Case Study: 4 Responses

profilevduglas2
CaseStudyResponses.docx

Instructions: Part 2 Directions:

React to your group mates’ responses from parts 1a and 1b by commenting on their posts. In reading the responses from part 1b, how are the plans and responses outlined similar to or different from  your leadership style’s response?

Your responses to others' posts are due 5/1 by 11:59 pm.

Deborah M Compton

SundayApr 23 at 1:36pm

Manage Discussion Entry

1. Who are the main stakeholder groups involved in the negotiation, and what are their primary interests?

 

There are many stakeholder groups involved in the negotiation.

· Douglas Meyers, the executive director of the Zoological Society of San Diego – ongoing

strategy of attracting zoo visitors, education of the public, and protecting endangered species.

· China – the sole source of pandas who can choose very selectively where to have panda exhibits in the world

· CWCA (China Wildlife Conservation Association) – sustainable development, panda protection

· Ministry of Forestry in China – worked with CWCA, an official source of pandas

· Chinese Association of Zoological Gardens (CAZG) – an official source of pandas

· San Diego Zoo – wanted to build a reputation as one of the greatest zoos in the world, needed a new exhibit every two years to boost revenue

· City of San Diego – positive economic impact from the Zoo by creating jobs, increasing tax revenue, and marketing purposes

· American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA) – promote values of public education and animal conservationism

· AAZPA’s Species Survival Plan (SSP) – breeding of certain endangered species

· ZZSD – nonprofit who runs the Zoo and Wild Animal Park, attracting visitors and driving revenue

· World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) – to protect pandas

· S. Government – Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1969 protects endangered species, also the Fish and Wildlife Services

· International Union for Conservation of Nature – nature conservation and animal rights

 

2. What are the main agenda items for negotiation? Which items would be the highest priority for each side? What issues would be the toughest for Myers to resolve?

 

The main agenda items for negotiation are loan fees, selection of pandas, duration of the panda's stay (Myers wanted a 14-year loan), ownership of cubs, training of the San Diego Zoo staff, and transportation from China to the San Diego Zoo. The CWCA's standards of care had to be considered, as well as specifications for accommodations, and ZZSD’s liability if a panda has an injury. The CWCA demanded that China’s National Conservation Project for the Giant Panda and Its Habitat be funded by the ZSSD. They also insisted that the U.S. does not need to know how funds provided for conservation are managed in China. They also “suggested” that ZSSD sponsor five Chinese officials for a Disneyland and Grand Canyon trip.

 

The highest item for Myers is a 14-year loan of a breeding pair of pandas and a long-term working relationship with the CWCA. The highest items for the CWCA are that the U.S. finance their Conservation Project, that they do not have to report on how money provided for conservation is managed and spent, and that five members of their team be sponsored on a trip to Disneyland and the Grand Canyon.

 

All three of the items are tough for Myers to resolve. 1) Paying for China's National Conservation Project for the Giant Panda and its Habitat would be cost-prohibitive. The first five years would cost approximately $56 million or 70% of ZSSD's entire 1991 budget. 2) The ZZSD is concerned that they cannot tell their shareholders how the Chinese use the funds for conservation. 3) Gifting this trip would violate the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

 

3. What is each respective side’s bargaining position?

 

Myers' position of requesting a long-term visit (14 years) shows concern for the conservation of the pandas rather than a short-term visit for commercial purposes only. The previous shorter visit showed that the San Diego Zoo is a viable partner. However, compared to China, his position is weak.

 

China's bargaining position is strong because they are the only source for the pandas. If one Zoo does not give in to their demands, there are plenty of other zoos all over the world that will.

 

4. What are viable alternatives to each of these group’s interest (their BATNA)? Does each group have a relatively favorable BATNA?

 

Myers has several BATNAs. First, he could negotiate a better % or sharing of the Conservation Project, negotiating for a 70/ split. Second, he could ask the Chinese to give him a non-detailed account of their programs or projects where they are using or may use conservation money. Third, he could move on to hosting a Big Cat or other exhibit to bring in visitors rather than Pandas.

 

The Chinese BATN is to negotiate for a short-term visit instead of the longer 14-year period or move on to negotiating with another zoo.

 

The Chinese definitely have the upper hand and the more favorable BATNAs.

 

 

Part 1b

1. Develop a communication strategy (point of departure, talking points) for your assigned stakeholder group.

2. How might you persuade a counterpart in negotiating this situation?

As a Deliberate Leader, I would prepare and have the facts and figures available to counter their arguments. I would also use the "awkward pause" technique since my leadership style is more introverted. I would work with my team to make my communication crystal clear. Deliberate Leaders work best under processes and procedures, so I would ensure I understood the parameters under which I could negotiate and why.

 

I would go into this negotiation knowing that the Chinese are "tough negotiators.” They negotiate with large teams and invest in "endless bargaining ." Patience is key when negotiating with them. I would also assume that they have a higher bargaining power in the negotiation because they have the pandas. They also have a wariness towards foreigners and an aversion to the press. All negotiations should be kept away from the media. I would also prepare to give a best offer and walk away if necessary for a specified period of time.

 

Regarding talking points, I would have the facts and figures available about the costs of the Conservation Program compared to other panda exhibits in the U.S. Many other countries have pandas and should share in the cost. Explain how we understand that the Chinese government wants to know how its money is spent, and the U.S. feels the same way. The U.S. government and the ZZSD shareholders would like to hear about the magnificent conservation programs they have devised for the pandas so we could use some of what they have learned for the species. I would explain the law that prohibits gifts to foreign governments and see if there is something we can do that does not involve money spent as gifts on officials.

 

2. How might they react?

So far, the Chinese have only made compromises after a very long impasse. The Chinese seem to make financial demands based on how much money they think Americans have, rather than on the cost of the program. They are not transparent as evidenced by their reluctance to talk about how they are spending conservation funds. I cannot see them being transparent about how much the Conservation Project costs. Plus, the Chinese are likely negotiating with other cities that may be more willing to compromise on their demands. I do not see the Chinese negotiating "in good faith", especially at the beginning of the process.

 

3. What are the costs and benefits of your strategy?

The benefits of increased visitors to the bottom line of the Zoo and to the whole city of San Diego are tremendous. It will add to the reputation of the Zoo as one of the best in the world. Not giving in to the Chinese demands could cost the Zoo and the city millions.

 

The costs of the Conservation Project (70% of the whole budget) definitely need to be taken into account, and a decision be made as to whether the increased revenue from the panda visit outweighs the cost of the Conservation Project. Under no circumstances should a trip for five Chinese officials to Disneyland and the Grand Canyon be paid for by the Zoo.

 

2. Pretend the CWCA demands that San Diego pays for the entire conservation program and has unfettered control over the use of those funds. If you were Myers – and using the perspective of your primary style-, how would you respond?

 

As a Deliberate Leader, I will know exactly what my parameters are for negotiation. If there is a situation where we accept these terms, I would have the processes and systems already worked out. I would state our position and explain with details if necessary. If my team felt that the added expenses of the Conservation Project and the unfettered control of those expenses were worth it, I would agree after negotiating a predetermined list of requests from the Zoo.

 

3. How would your responses to the above two questions be similar to or different from

how you would actually respond?

 

The importance of the panda visit to the Zoo's reputation and the impact on the whole city of San Diego cannot be overstated. I would also like to know how another type of exhibit compares. Perhaps another exhibit without the additional costs would be just as good.

 

 I would negotiate to learn the actual cost of the conservation program, which may be an exercise in futility since they want control over those monies. With all the facts and figures and the assurance that the city and Zoo would benefit financially from the panda visit, I would give in to the demands after stepping away from the table a few times for specified lengths of time.