1. Principles of distributive negotiation used by Sherman to gain his advantage

Sherman focused on the interests of the negotiation with Bristol-Meyers. He is insisting on his companies’ position and even gives a demand. He applies the strategy of principled negotiation and a compromising style with deception to introduce a clause that means this big cost to Bristol-Meyers, if the deal is rejected by the FTC. Sherman seems to have taken time to predict the behavior of the other side of the negotiators, the Bristol-Meyers, so he was able to do prior preparation and strengthen his ground. Judge and Robbins (2011) advise on standing one’s ground during negotiations. Sherman stood his ground and focused on the reason for the negotiations rather than the friendship. He was foresighted in the negotiation as he is seen introducing a conditional clause in the deal that would cost Bristol-Meyers &60 million.

2. Whether or not Sherman behaved ethically.

Sherman behaved unethically in his action of allowing Apotex to start shipping drugs, while at the same time they were negotiating with Bristol-Meyers. His introduction of a clause that could have seen Bristol-Meyers part with $60 million can also be considered as being unethical, though the action is legal. There is a great evidence of differences between these two sides of negotiators. Sherman is a type of negotiator who considers the other side as being adversaries, while the Bristol-Meyers negotiators are of the type that sees the other side as being friends. So in this scenario, Sherman is hard on the negotiators and the problem, while the Bristol-Meyers representatives are cultivating a friendship. According to Judge and Robbins (2011), people who negotiate with a style like the one used by Bristol-Meyers don’t achieve their share in the negotiations.

3. Role of deception in negotiations.

Deception, like it is used in this case scenario by Sherman, is an aspect of economic interactions. Gneezy (2005) observes that politicians, business people, students and lawyers have in time no been honest with their dealings. Negotiation is a competitive dealing in which the parties involved have interests. Gneezy (2005) advises that while in the negotiation table, it is important for the negotiator to be keen not to be deceived. This is because the interests at stake are the subject matter of the negotiations. Every side doesn’twant to lose, and every side wants to gain more and more. It is therefore, important that ethics be employed and that trust be followed up while negotiating. The big issue is trusting. Successful negotiators approach negotiations considering the other side as adversaries. They are thus not likely to trust them. The rate of deception can thus be very high from the two sides.

References

Gneezy, U. (2005). Deception: The role of consequences. The American Economic Review, 95 (1): 384-394.

Judge, T. A. & Robbins, S. P. (2011).  Organizational behavior (14^th Edition).  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.  Retrieved fromhttps://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu/#/books/9780558761431/page/48833965