Case Incident: DAVID OUT-NEGOTIATING GOLIATH: APOTEX AND BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB

Posted on by
2

Case Incident: DAVID OUT-NEGOTIATING GOLIATH: APOTEX AND BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB

Note: All content provided in this post is for informational purposes only. If you believe this was accurate and useful plz rate or vote it. If you think something was wrong or missing plz post it as comment.

1.  What principles of distributive negotiation did Sherman use to gain  his advantage? 

Ans. Sherman use making of aggressive first offer principle of distributive negotiation to gain his advantage.  Sherman try to extract an agreement from Bristol-Myers that would position Apotex favorably should the FTC reject the deal. Sherman inserted a clause in the deal that would require Bristol-Myers to paly Apotex $60 million if the FTC rejected the deal. Sherman try to get maximum of pie from Bristol-Myers.

2. Do you think Sherman behaved ethically? Why or why not?    

Ans. I think Sherman did not behaved ethically. Privately , Sherman was betting that FTC would not approve the non compete agreement the two parties negotiating, and his goal in negotiation was to extract an agreement from Bristol-Myers. Sherman misrepresentation of facts seams like un ethical.

3. What does this incident tell you about the role of deception in negotiation? 

Ans. Evidence indicates that deception in negotiations can produce short-term advantage’s. But in this case deception produce long-term advantage’s. Deception in all acceptable in all kinds of negotiations. It has risk factor which may leads to lost trust and further negotiations.

Case Incident: THE MAKING OF A GREAT PRESIDENT

Posted on by
Reply

Case Incident: THE MAKING OF A GREAT PRESIDENT

Note: All content provided in this post is for informational purposes only. If you believe this was accurate and useful plz rate or vote it. If you think something was wrong or missing plz post it as comment.

1. Do you think leaders in other contexts (business, sports, religion) exhibit the same qualities as great U.S presidents? 

Ans. I think leaders in the other contexts may not exhibit all the same quality’s as a great U.S. presidents. A sports person can take risk decision to dive from 10 stair building which exhibit his/her personal risk, where as U.S. president may not take any personal risk decision in certain suctions which involves economy, environment and people. A leader in religion may exhibit unconventional behavior but which way not a good quality for U.S president to exhibit.

2. How important do you think charisma is to a president’s  greatness? 

Ans. Charisma is important to a president but it is not that much important for president’s greatness. A president’s greatness is not only set by charisma it is also involved with other.  A high charisma president needs a good situation to influence followers. A charisma president can influence his followers with his vision and articulation. Followers attribute heroic or extraordinary leadership abilities when they observer charisma leader behavior.

3. Do you think being in the right place at the right time could influence presidential greatness?   

Ans. Yes I think being in the right place at right time could influence presidential greatness. Franklin D. Roosevelt  offered a vision to get the United States out of the great depression in the 1930’s. His perception to followers, abilities and responses to their needs and feelings influenced presidential greatness.

4. Do you think historians can be biased in evaluating a president’s greatness? If so, how? 

Ans. I don’t think only historians can be biased in evaluating a presidents greatness. A past president ideology can not be good for present day and present president ideology may not be good for past time. Being in the right place at the right time can also change the evaluating a president greatness.

Case Incident: HERD BEHAVIOR AND THE HOUSING BUBBLE (AND COLLAPS)

Posted on by
Reply

Case Incident: HERD BEHAVIOR AND THE HOUSING BUBBLE (AND COLLAPS)

Note: All content provided in this post is for informational purposes only. If you believe this was accurate and useful plz rate or vote it. If you think something was wrong or missing plz post it as comment.

1. Some  research suggests heard behavior increases as the size of the group increases. Why do you think this might be the case? 

Ans. Yes herd behavior increases as the size  of the group increases. As the group of the size increases group will follow certain norms. If  one of the person find any benefits from any resources then every one in the group try to gain benefit from same resource. If any member added to group, he/she need acceptance by group.  Thus the member is susceptible to conforming to the group norms. There are considerable  evidence  that the group can place strong pressure on individual member to change there attitude and behavior to conform to the group standards.  Every individual try to compare with other group members and try to be equal with them. As a result, increase herd behavior as group increases.

2.  One researcher argues that “pack behavior” comes about because it has benefits. What is the upside of such behavior? 

Ans. In certain ways pack behavior have benefits. Pack behavior was seen most commonly in an exclusive circle of people with a common purpose. The pack will be leaded by a individual in a group who can restrict  the other individuals in the group. Leader will have more responsibilities with in the pack and about the pack.  Leader will make every one comfort in the pack. All the members will follow the pack leader and leader will use certain methods  to keep the followers in line.

3.  Shiller argues that herd behavior can go both ways: It explains the housing bubble, but it also explains the bust. As they see others bidding down home prices to abnormally low levels.” Do you agree with Shiller? 

Ans. Yes I agree with Shiller. We can also observe  herd behavior go both ways in share market. For example if there was any negative news regarding a company  then people immediately begin sell  off  shares of the stock. In other way if any good news about a company was reported in the news then people start buying the company shares which will drive up the stock price.

4. How might organizations combat the problems resulting from heard behavior?   

Ans. Herd behavior in organizations was mostly seen in groups. If any one in group are lazy or inept, then seeing them others will also reestablish equality by reducing there effort. As if all individuals in whole group reduce there effort, productivity will reduce. This is because group results cannot be attributed to any single person, the relationship between an individual’s input and group output is clouded. There are several ways to prevent this  1). set group goals, so the group has a common purpose to strive towards; 2). increase intergroup competitions, which again focuses on the shared outcome; 3). engage in peer evaluation so each person evaluates each other person’s contribution; 4). select members who have high motivation and prefer to work in group, and 5). if possible, base group rewards in part on each member’s unique contributions.

Case Incident: BULLYING BOSSES

Posted on by
Reply

Case Incident: BULLYING BOSSES

Note: All content provided on this post is for informational purposes only. If you believe this was accurate and useful plz rate or vote it. If you think something was wrong or missing plz post it as comment.

1.  Workplace billying demonstrates a lack of which one of the three types of organizational justice? 

Ans. Workplace bullying demonstrates a lack of Interactional Justice among the three types of organizational justice. Bullying employees means, treating them without dignity, concern and respect.

2. What aspects of motivation might workplace bullying reduce? For example, are there likely to be effects on an employee’s self-efficacy? If so, what might those effects be? 

Ans. If we consider Hierarch of needs theory, a early theory of Motivation there exists a hierarchy of five needs: Physiological, Safety, Social, Esteem, Self-actualization. Workplace bullying has moderate impact on Safety, Social and high impact on Esteem, Self-actualization of aspects of motivation. By bullying an employee there will a long last effect on self-efficacy. He or She can not drive to become what they are capable of becoming. “The victims may feel less motivated to go to work every day, they continue performing there required job duties with fear, some are less motivated to perform extra-role or citizenship behaviors. Helping others, speaking positively about organization, and going beyond the call of the duty are reduced as a result of bullying”.

3.  If you were a victim of workplace bullying, what steps would you take to reduce its occurrence? What strategies would be most effective? Least effective? What would you do if one of you colleagues were a victim? 

Ans. If I were the victims of workplace bullying I will try to talk with appropriate committee how can control bully. Most effective strategy would be increase higher-order needs that are satisfied internally, such as social, esteem, and self-actualization needs. By doing this it will drive me to became what I am capable of becoming. Least effective would be leaving the job. This may not be the good strategy to do because I may feel dissatisfaction in other job due to this incident. If one of colleagues were a victim I will not blame, annoy him/her. I will try to understand what level of the hierarchy that person is currently on and focus on satisfying the needs at or above that level and motivate victim as much as I can. I try to take necessary steps against bully.

4.  What factors do you believe contribute to workplace bullying? Are bullies a product of the situations, or do they have flawed personalities? What situations and what personality factors might contribute to the presence of bullies? 

Ans. I strongly believe in-equality and comparison  are the main factors contribute to workplace bullying. “Most of the bullies are products of situation and some of them do have flawed personalities. Employees might compare themselves to  friends, neighbors, co-workers, or colleagues in other organizations or compare their present job with past jobs”, in-equality in power and position, these are situations contribute to the presence of bullies.  Negative and stressful working environment, low self esteem are the personality factors might contribute to the presence of bullies.

Case Incident: The Upside Of Anger?

Posted on by
Reply

Case Incident: The Upside Of Anger?

Note: All content provided in this post is for informational purposes only. If you believe this was accurate and useful plz rate or vote it. If you think something was wrong or missing plz post it as comment.

1. Do you think Laura is justified in her responses to her organization’s culture? Why or why not? 

Ans. No, I don’t think Laura was justified in her responses to her organization’s culture. She describes her workplace was cold and unproductive. Anger and hatred towards other people, other staff members are the kind of emotions prevalent in Laura’s organization.

2. Do you think Laura’s strategic use and display of emotions serve to protect her? 

Ans. Yes , Laura’s strategic use and display of emotions serve to protect her. She have to catch her emotions to the sort of situation, the specific situation because its was hostile environment. Laura put on an act because, Managers don’t like there employees to show there emotions in work environment. Even it was hard to hide emotions sometime, she cannot afford to do that because its her job and she need money.

3.  Assuming that Laura’s description is accurate, how would you react to the organization’s culture? 

Ans. I will try not to annoy management. I will try to keep workplace friendly and more productive. I will try to interact with other staff members and managers.

4.  Research show that acts of co-workers (37 percent) and management (22 percent) cause more negative emotions for employees that do acts of customers (7 percent). What can Laura’s company do to change its emotional climate? 

Ans. Laura’s company should increases Social activities in there company to show it was friendly workplace to work. Managers should not ignore co-workers and employees emotions and assign other behavior as if it were completely rational. Managers who understand the role of emotions and moods will significantly improve there ability to explain and predict there co-workers and employees behavior.