Negotiation Arithmetic Critical Analysis

ASSIGNMENT I – COMPARE AND CONTRAST
This assignment will focus on three separate literary extracts and articles; James K. Sebenius´s article on “Negotiation Arithmetic: Adding and Subtracting Issues and Parties” in the journal “International Organizations” (Sibenious, 1983), Ralph L. Keeney and Howard Raiffa´s segment “Structuring and Analyzing Values for Multiple-Issue Negotiations´” in H. Young´s book “Negotiation Analysis” (Keeney & Raiffa, 1991) and I. William Zartman and Rubin Z. Jeffery’s first chapter on “The study of Power and the Practice of Negotiation” in their book “Power and Negotiation” (Zartman & Rubin, 2002) and will be reflected on based on a three, distinct, predefined questions.
HOW CAN ACADEMIC ANALYSIS ASSIST NEGOTIATIONS

Sebenius bring out a quote by Francois de Calliere to exemplify his attitude towards mutually beneficial negotiations and when boiled down to its core it states “friendship between men is nothing but commerce, but the great secret of negotiation is to bring out common advantages to both sides and to link them so that they appear equally balanced to both parties” through this he moves on with his theories on linking issues as this may result in a situation where individual issues can be regarded as a zero-sum game when under negotiations but when compiled and linked in a greater issue package, there is an opening for overall bargains that are mutually beneficial for all parties, he does however also note that these packages are not always beneficial for a specific party, but in these cases we may at times see the further addition of issues to the package as a form of relative gain

Sebenius maintains a dualistic approach to power dynamics, admitting that it both has perks and flaws for the party in question. At the positive end of the spectrum, he acknowledges that relative power is useful in the sense that it can be used as leverage to either force in new issues to a negotiation agenda or simply to be employed as a looming threat as could be seen in his Nissan + Japanese Government vs. Mexico example, where the relative power of the Japanese Government was used to shift power dynamics in favor of Nissan. At the same time he also notes that the stronger party is cohered to initiate the negotiations and to ensure that a union of interests with a lesser party is established thus harmonizing the relations and interests from the very beginning.
Power dynamics is however not a focus in Ralph L. Keeney and Howard Raiffa´s segment in “Negotiation Analysis” but they do hint at relative negotiation power when considering a party´s understanding of its own fundamental interests and argues that such understandings are positive in the sense that they improve the position of the party but does not provide any detailed information on the