Analyzing a High-Profile Negotiation in the Last Five Years

Participation Guidelines

Overview This paper analyzes a high-profile negotiation that has occurred in the last five years. Guidelines Participation For this assignment, you may work alone or with a partner of your choosing. If working with a partner, keep the following in mind. One of the most difficult aspects of working within teams is when you encounter the "free rider" effect. This is when a member of a team doesn't complete his or her share of the work, assuming the other team member(s) will cover it. To prevent this, please report problems with your partners early so the instructor can help the team address issues. In addition, a peer feedback sheet will be used upon completion of the project. This feedback will help the instructor allocate individual grades and lower the grade for a person who is not a productive members of the team. While there may not be problems in your group, you must be able to document your contribution to the team project in case there are concerns about individual contributions. Avoiding Plagiarism Plagiarism is using someone else's words and not giving them credit. Every quotation and all other borrowed information must be documented, even if paraphrased. Please cite your work appropriately using APA guidelines (Links to an external site.). To help you avoid plagiarism and to provide feedback, the instructor may use plagiarism detection software, such as Turnitin (Links to an external site.). Structure Your paper should have a title page, a table of contents (optional), the core content of the paper (introduction, body, and conclusion), and a reference (works cited) list. The paper should have page numbers printed at the bottom of the page with the exception of the title page. The title page should include the title of the paper, your team members' names, the course title, the instructor's name, and the date of submission. The title page does not contain a typed page number but is counted in the overall length of the paper. The page after the title page, therefore, is page 2. Format Papers should be typed, double-spaced, and grammatically correct. They should include a reference list in APA style. They should be typed in a 12-point font with one-inch margins. Length A guideline for this term paper is between 9 and 12 pages long (2,250–3,000 words). The maximum is 12 pages, so if you find yourself over this amount, consider altering the scope of the paper. Research This paper requires research. Do not use information off such websites as Wikipedia without instructor approval. Library databases are fine to use and do not require approval. The following two databases available from Penn State are highly recommended: ProQuest Direct (check the peer review option for academic papers) and LexisNexis. Content Start early by choosing a high-profile negotiation that has occurred in the last five years. If working with a partner, negotiate who will do what on the paper as well as the process of communication. Write down the ground rules for your team and submit it to the team ground rules drop box. Apply course concepts and theories to the negotiation. Include the answers to the following questions in your analysis: Describe the situation and key parties’ goals and interests. Who (if any) were the other stakeholders in the negotiation, and what role did they play? Did any coalitions form during the process? Describe the give and take of the negotiation and the process. What was the outcome? Was this an appropriate way to solve the conflict based on negotiation theory? What types of power were used? How did the parties influence one another? What communication methods were used to influence the negotiation? What specific distributive and/or integrative tactics were used in the negotiation? What would your team have done differently based on your research and analysis? How would a different approach or situation have changed the outcome? Remember to apply course concepts to the analysis and to bold concepts applied. Note: Regardless if you are working with a partner or not, each student needs to submit their own paper. However, you should note your partner's name on your paper along with your own. Rubric High-Profile Negotiation Analysis High-Profile Negotiation Analysis Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction: Introduce assignment and organization of paper 5 pts Excellent Introduction is strong and includes purpose of the assignment and organization of paper, both of which are well-developed. 4 pts Very Good Introduction is developed but may be missing either the purpose of the assignment or the organization of the paper. 3 pts Average Introduction is adequately developed and may be missing either the purpose of the assignment or organization of the paper. 2 pts Needs Improvement | 1-2 pts Introduction is not well-developed. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 0 pts No credit. Introduction is missing. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary of the negotiation 10 pts Excellent | 9-10 pts Strong summary that outlines the key people and issues. The summary is completed in one to two paragraphs. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 8 pts Very Good Very good summary completed in one to two paragraphs. Detail on the negotiation is provided. 7 pts Average Summary completed in 1-–2 paragraphs but does not sufficiently provide an overview of the negotiation. 6 pts Needs Improvement | 1-6 pts Summary contains too much detail and/or rambles and/or is too short; flows poorly. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 0 pts No credit. Summary is missing. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeApplication of negotiation concepts/terms to negotiation (bold the concept/terms) 45 pts Excellent | 41-45 pts Strong analysis; concepts and terms are consistently applied throughout the paper and are used correctly; concepts/terms used are bolded. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 40 pts Very Good | 36-40 pts Concepts and terms are applied throughout the paper, but some terms may not be used correctly; concepts/terms used are bolded. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 35 pts Average | 28-35 pts Concepts and terms are adequately applied throughout the paper but there may be some that are not used correctly; some concepts/terms used are not bolded. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 27 pts Needs Improvement | 1-27 pts Concepts and terms are not present or not consistently applied throughout the paper and, when present, are not used correctly; concepts/terms used are not bolded or are sporadically bolded. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 0 pts No credit. Summary is missing. 45 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResearch: The quality of the sources are assessed. Use sources from Penn State databases, trade journals, business magazines, and newspapers for best results. Do not use Wikipedia. 20 pts Excellent | 18-20 pts Uses 8–9 sources. Sources used are high quality (periodicals, journals, and well-respected newspapers). Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 17 pts Very Good | 16-17 pts. Uses 6–7 sources. Sources used are from periodicals, journals, and/or well-respected newspapers. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 15 pts Average | 14-15 pts Uses 4–5 sources. Sources used are from periodicals, journals, or well-respected newspapers; there are some sources that are from lesser- known publications or Internet sites. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 13 pts Needs Improvement | 1-13 pts. Uses 0-3 sources. There are fewer than 3 sources and/or the sources may not be from respected publications. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 0 pts There are no sources. Summary is missing. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion: Summary of assignment and what was learned 5 pts Excellent A strong summary and at least four lessons learned are included. 4 pts Very Good A very good summary and at least three lessons learned are included. 3 pts Average An adequate summary and at least two lessons learned are included. 2 pts Needs Improvement | 1-2 pts The conclusion is weak and/or only one or none of the lessons learned is included. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 0 pts No credit. Conclusion is missing. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStyle Written in correct APA style with in-text citations and a reference list at the end of the document. 10 pts Excellent | 9-10 pts All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented in the desired format, both as in-text citations and as references in the Works Cited list Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 8 pts Very Good All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but a few are not in the desired format. 7 pts Average | 6-7 pts All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but some are not in the desired format; some in-text citations or references in the Works Cited list may be missing. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 5 pts Needs Improvement | 1-5 pts. Some sources are not accurately documented, or APA style was not used or was used incorrectly. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 0 pts There are no sources. Very poor use of grammar with many spelling and/or punctuation errors. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics: Typing, spelling, grammar 5 pts Excellent No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. 4 pts Very Good Almost no grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. 3 pts Average | 2-3 pts Some grammatical, spelling, and/or punctuation errors. Note: Instructor has the right to award range of points based upon the quality of work. 2 pts Needs Improvement Poor use of grammar with many spelling and/or punctuation errors. 0 pts No credit. Extremely poor use of grammar with an unacceptable number of spelling and/or punctuation errors. 5 pts Total Points: 100