What's Your Question?

What Is a Case Study?

When you’re performing research as part of your job or for a school assignment, you’ll probably come across case studies that help you to learn more about the topic at hand. But what is a case study and why are they helpful? Read on to learn all about case studies.

Deep Dive into a Topic

At face value, a case study is a deep dive into a topic. Case studies can be found in many fields, particularly across the social sciences and medicine. When you conduct a case study, you create a body of research based on an inquiry and related data from analysis of a group, individual or controlled research environment.

As a researcher, you can benefit from the analysis of case studies similar to inquiries you’re currently studying. Researchers often rely on case studies to answer questions that basic information and standard diagnostics cannot address.

Study a Pattern

One of the main objectives of a case study is to find a pattern that answers whatever the initial inquiry seeks to find. This might be a question about why college students are prone to certain eating habits or what mental health problems afflict house fire survivors. The researcher then collects data, either through observation or data research, and starts connecting the dots to find underlying behaviors or impacts of the sample group’s behavior.

Gather Evidence

During the study period, the researcher gathers evidence to back the observed patterns and future claims that’ll be derived from the data. Since case studies are usually presented in the professional environment, it’s not enough to simply have a theory and observational notes to back up a claim. Instead, the researcher must provide evidence to support the body of study and the resulting conclusions.

Present Findings

As the study progresses, the researcher develops a solid case to present to peers or a governing body. Case study presentation is important because it legitimizes the body of research and opens the findings to a broader analysis that may end up drawing a conclusion that’s more true to the data than what one or two researchers might establish. The presentation might be formal or casual, depending on the case study itself.

Draw Conclusions

Once the body of research is established, it’s time to draw conclusions from the case study. As with all social sciences studies, conclusions from one researcher shouldn’t necessarily be taken as gospel, but they’re helpful for advancing the body of knowledge in a given field. For that purpose, they’re an invaluable way of gathering new material and presenting ideas that others in the field can learn from and expand upon.


pacific oil company case study negotiation


Pacific Oil Company Failed Negotiation Essay example

Integrative negotiations essay.

Looking at the parties involved in the negotiation, it was clear that each party would have agendas that would be in conflict with each other. For instance, the other ports in the region would like the highest compensation possible while Harborco would like the lowest compensation. Additionally, each party would also have a minimum threshold score that they would need from each outcome before they would support the project. Therefore, it is clear that this is an integrative negotiation which requires joint problem solving to achieve

Pacific Oil Essay

They represent Pacific Oil in one location, while decision impacting their negotiations are being made in another location, such as the decision to manufacture, or not manufacture, PVC. Fontaine and Gaudin might have engage in some of the decision making processes taking place within Pacific Oil. Another disadvantage for Fontaine and Gaudin was their negotiating locations. Their concern for time prevented them from setting up negotiations where they may have gained some power from perception in their own corporate environment. There were a number of ways for Pacific Oil to address the issue of their power imbalance with

Negotiation Planning Essay

In any negotiation, preparation is crucial; and having a set, outlined process to follow when preparing helps mitigate a potential oversight of any significant issues within the negotiation. Following a set process also helps one stay on task and in-line with what the important issues and factors are in a negotiation. In Bargaining for Advantage, G. Richard Shell provides a well-structured framework to follow in planning for a negotiation. For this reason, I used Shell’s negotiation preparation framework to plan for the negotiation between Rapid Printing Company (Rapid) and Scott Computers, Inc (Scott).

Week 3 Case Study Pacific Oil Company Essay

It would seem that the types of negotiators each of our characters took on also had a fair part in the way the negotiations played out. Bhand (2010) discusses the four types of negotiators. I don’t believe we see all four of the negotiation types displayed in this negotiation, but rather that Fontaine and Gaudin share the same negotiation technique while Hauptmann, and Zinnser take on very different methods to the negotiating. Let’s start with Fontaine and Gaudin. From the first visit between Gaudin and Hauptmann in December to the combined visit of Fontaine and Gaudin in March, Lewiski (n.d.) points out the factors of the established relationship between Pacific Oil and Reliant Chemical, and the thought of Fontaine and Gaudin that the negotiations will be without any real problems. This thought process, and the way it continues to drive the negotiation going forward falls into Bhand’s definition of a negotiator low on task orientation but high on relationship orientation. “They have a mindset that if the relationship with the other negotiator is ‘good’ then it will be easy to negotiate…rarely disagreeing with the other party, they want to please the other party by agreeing to most demands” (2010). This behavior is displayed over and over again with Fontaine and Gaudin in that they do not disagree with any of the Reliant Chemical demands outright, but rather they

Essay on Pacific Oil Company

Identify the strengths and weaknesses of Fontaine's and Gaudin's negotiating strategy in their deliberations with Reliant Chemical Company. How effectively did Fontaine and Gaudin approach the negotiation?

Power in Negotiations Essay examples

Negotiation is a fundamental form of dispute resolution involving two or more parties (Michelle, M.2003). Negotiations can also take place in order to avoid any future disputes. It can be either an interpersonal or inter-group process. Negotiations can occur at international or corporate level and also at a personal level. Negotiations often involve give and take acknowledging that there is interdependence between the disputants to some extent to achieve the goal. This means that negotiations only arise when the goals cannot be achieved independently (Lewicki and Saunders et al., 1997). Interdependence means the both parties can influence the outcome for the other party and vice versa. The negotiations can be win-lose or win-win in nature.

Myti-Pet Case Report

There were three primary changes that I would make if given the opportunity to redo this negotiation. First, I would more immediately suggest that a contingent contract be used to address the quality of product vs. long-term contract debate. In hindsight, it could have been very efficient to propose an agreement that allowed for Rawmat’s longer term deal while also recognizing Myti-Pet’s desire for higher quality. By not initially considering a contingency contract, our group fell into the trap discussed in Bazerman and Gillespie (1999). We simply did not allow ourselves to consider a contingency contract, and when the idea was first proposed we initially felt uncomfortable with the concept. In hindsight, this reaction was highly unproductive.

The Texasags Oil Company Case Study Analysis

One of the major failures that occurred in the case was the time length of the negotiation. The negotiation took almost one year to come to certain terms of the Cousins and is not even completed yet. Hertford and Foster’s lack of preparation and power to make decisions lead to such lengthy negotiation. Both of them don’t have solid figures of what their restriction points should be, except formula price. Most times, they have to keep forwarding the Cousins negotiation terms to their bosses and get their approvals. It made clear to the Cousins that expect basic formula price, the TexasAgs have no other concrete information. It also gave ample amount of time to raise issues such as market fluctuations, competitive

The Pacific Oil Company Essay

On the other hand, Hauptmann indicated that Reliant wanted to renegotiate the current agreement, but over stated their supply throughout the negotiation. Also, they communicated to Pacific they only wanted to make a commitment for a two-year contract renewable. But the style of Frederich Hauptmann’s, senior purchasing manager for Reliant Chemicals in Europe, negotiation tactics was that of power. He was only brought in four weeks prior to the Pacific and Reliant contract talks. Hauptmann stated that Reliant did not want to over extend their obligation and did not agree on Pacific’s analysis and minimum requirements. Zinnser communicated that they pleased with the current relationship with Pacific but was concern ed for about the Future. Reliant felt that Pacific’s basic formula price on VCM was currently fair, but might not remain competitive in the near future. Hauptmann wanted Pacific to freeze the minimum projections for two years and then they would increase it in the third year. Fontaine and Gaudin were very surprised by this outcome and tried repeatedly to persuade Hauptmann that the minimums were understated and that the PVC market was going to prosper beyond Reliant’s forecast. New information will frequently come to light during a negotiation, and negotiators need to manage the paradox between sticking with their prepared strategy and pursuing a new opportunity

What Takeover Defenses Did Warner Use To Fend Off Pfizer

The initial defense from warner should have come from the initial agreement, anticipating the Pfizer proposal and leaving no room to Pfizer to legal actions or hostile proposals. In my view, the standstill clause must have been reinforced by not allowing Pfizer any merge proposal even though, the third party proposals

Contract Creation and Management Simulation

Span must recognize its role in the negotiations process. It has a short- and long-term goal. The short-term goal is to achieve an amicable conclusion to the current contract. The long-term goal is securing future contracts.

Personal Negotiation Essay

Negotiation and Conflict Application Paper I immigrated to the United States 15 years ago in pursuit of higher education and a successful career. I discovered that I had to significantly readjust the habits engrained in me from childhood through interacting with new people and dealing with conflicts. My traditional and conservative upbringing in India provided a sheltered environment and programmed me into listening and obeying elders and avoiding conflict at all costs. It was my belief that any conflict big or small with the close ones would cause a strain in the relationships. Thus, I often avoided conflicts and accommodated the wishes of others at the cost of my own. I considered this

Negotiation Reflection

Consequently, negotiation is a process that can be approached in many ways. No matter what strategy we choose, success lies in how well we prepared. The key to negotiating a beneficial outcome is the negotiators’ ability to consider all the elements of the situation carefully and to identify and think through the options. At the same time, negotiators must be able to keep events in perspective and be as fair and honest as circumstance allows. Because a common ground or interest has brought the parties to the negotiating table, a negotiator can benefit by trying to capitalize on this common

Research Essay: Power and Negotiation

Consider how an imbalance between 'high power' and 'low power' parties might shape a negotiation process. How might an experienced mediator deal with this problem? Provide practical examples where appropriate.

Pacific Oil Case Study Analysis

As Pacific Oil began their negotiations to renew their existing contract, which was due to expire within the year, a major problem was surfacing. This problem: the availability and demand for VCM products. It was the old rule of supply and demand coming into play.

Related Topics


Pacific oil case study questions and sample answers, the complications that pacific oil company confronted as it reopened discussions with reliant chemical company in early 1985.

            When Pacific Oil Company was first negotiating with Reliant Chemical Company, the demand on product was very high and supply was minimal thus project stable market and good returns for over a long period. However, after negotiation was completed and contracts were sign, another development in the market emerged(Raiffa, H., 1982). Several chemical manufacturing firms were built thus increased the supply of the products into the market. This led to excess products available in the market thus affected the long-term contract sign between Pacific Oil Company and Reliant Chemical Company. The changes in the market dynamics was projected to affect adversely the performance of the Pacific Oil Company if the contract was to be sustained, as a result they opted for re-opening negotiations to factor in the present changes experienced in the market.

            The shifting from high demand of VCM products to excessive supply was occasion by immenseimproved in global manufacturing abilities for VCM. During the negotiation process, Pacific Oil Company failed to anticipate for increasing manufacturing capacities due to the emerging manufacturers of VCM in the world. During negotiations Pacific Oil Company relied heavily on the demand of the VCM at that time and projected the supply and demand to remain constant for over a long period of time(Lewicki, R., 1993). As a result, Jean who represented the Pacific Oil Company failed to effectively research on the demands of the Reliant Chemicals Company as well as project precisely what the outcome might be. Additionally, Pacific Oil Company had not organizedsufficiently to address future distresses and did not applied comprehensivearbitration strategy that included best alternative as well as eventuality plan. What come out clearly during the first negotiation was that Pacific Oil Company overlooked the need to formulate the best alternative as well as bottom line in advances. Although both Pacific Oil Company and Reliant Chemical Company wanted to move forward quickly to signing contract , Pacific Oil Company was not cautious about market dynamics(Meerts, P., 1999).Increased manufacturing capacities for VCM in the world also increase market completion, as a result, Pacific Oil Company bow down to the pressure by lowering the prices of VCM.

The strategies and success of Messrs, Fontaine, Gaudin, Hauptmann and Zinnser as mediators in this cases

Fontaine the marketing vp europe of pacific oil company &gaudin of vcm marketing manager of pacific oil company.

Hauptmann the senior purchasing manager reliant Europe and Zinnser the regional VP operation reliant Europe

Negotiation Tactics used

What should Frank Kelsey Commend to Jean Fontaine at the end of the case?

Grab this first time Discount, and save up to 50% on your first Order Due in Less Than 48 Hours.

No thanks, I’m not interested

pacific oil company case study negotiation

The Pacific Oil Case: Conflict Management and Negotiation

Pacific Oil Case Conflict Management and Negotiation Paul Gaudin and Jean Fontaine negotiated a favorable contract for Pacific Oil Company in 1982 with Reliant Chemical Company. Gaudin and Fontaine prepared well for this negotiation, but they assumed it that negotiations would be quick and easy. Gaudin and Fontaine believed that even with the current and future market condition, a positive outcome could be obtained by offering the best service possible and having an established positive relationship. However, their aspiration to gain a favorable “re-negotiated” contract was hamstrung by competition; market expansion for vinyl chloride monomer “VCM”, and a different style of negotiation by Reliant. The first problem with the renegotiation of this contract was the projected demand for VCM creating a “buyers market”, according to the textbook, “the demand was high, but the supply was to increase exponentially” (Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry 2010) Reliant was already locked into a five year contract with Pacific Oil, but there would be stiff competition at the expiration of the that contract. Knowledge of this market situation put Reliant in a position of leverage and trapped Pacific Oil into a desperate sign at all costs scenario. Gaudin and Fontaine assumed that even with a fluctuation with price; Reliant would sign a new because of their established relationship Pacific Oil. Gaudin and Fontaine’s assumption opened themselves up to more concessions by not attaching conditions to the price adjustment. They could have countered with a reduction of the formula price on the condition of contract length. Another problem that Pacific Oil Company faced was their own internal research and development of expanding the ... ... middle of paper ... ...d be in peril because Reliant could essentially control the prices of the product. Then sell it to potential Pacific clients, thus eliminating any future revenue streams. If Reliant insists that this is a deal breaker, then stopping or stalling the negotiations may be the only resort, because Pacific Oil needs to regain control the negotiation. This may allow another competitor to come in and make their pitch, but Pacific Oil cannot afford any more concessions nor can they afford to allow Reliant to take away potential customers or control their formula costs. References TRACY, B. (2013). The Six Styles of Negotiating. Mworld, 12(3), 21. Craver, C. B. (2003). Negotiation Styles. Dispute Resolution Journal, 58(1), 48. Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY

In this essay, the author

Related Topics

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Provide details on what you need help with along with a budget and time limit. Questions are posted anonymously and can be made 100% private.

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Studypool matches you to the best tutor to help you with your question. Our tutors are highly qualified and vetted.

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Your matched tutor provides personalized help according to your question details. Payment is made only after you have completed your 1-on-1 session and are satisfied with your session.

Pacific Oil Company Case Study

User Generated


Business Finance

Arizona State University


Read the case study and answer these questions

1.Identify the strengths and weaknesses of Fontaine’s and Gaudin’s negotiating strategy in their deliberations with Reliant Chemical Company.

2. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of Hayptman’s and Zinnser’s negotiation strategy.

3. What action should Fontaine take at the end of the case? 

Unformatted Attachment Preview

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Explanation & Answer

pacific oil company case study negotiation

See attached😎 1 Pacific Oil Company Case Study Student's Name Institutional Affiliation Course Number Instructor's Name Date 2 Pacific Oil Company Case Study Introduction Pacific Oil Company was caught in a scuffle with Reliant. In the case study, several pitfalls and failures the Pacific Oil Company made in its negotiations with Reliant have been highlighted. The company's negotiating strategies and those used by Reliant have been given in various case studies. This paper will analyze the strengths and weaknesses that both parties had in their negotiation strategies. Question 1. Strengths and Weaknesses of Fontaine's and Gaudin's Negotiating Strategy Strengths One of the strengths of Fontaine and Gaudin was the strong connection that they had already formed. When the companies formulated their strategies, they had made long-life strategies with Reliant Chemical. Even though they had a strong bond, the connection was more out of the competitive process than a relationship. With a strong competitive strategy, they had a strong connection that strengthened their negotiating strategy. They also had good bargaining techniques. Their bargaining technique is evidenced by the agreement they made. They negotiated for 1% for every pound in the deal compared to the initial offer of 2% proposed by Reliant Chemical on Vinyl Chloride Monomer's formula price. They establish a good negotiating climate by establishing rapport with the other team before the negotiations kick-off. This strategy encourages more independent relationships between the groups and breaks any tensions that arise during the negotiating strategy. It creates room for the parties to back down while maintaining a healthy communication line (Lewis et al., 2017). Weaknesses 3 Fontaine and Gaudin had poor planning strategies in their negotiation tactics. They failed to plan, or their planning was insufficient for any renegotiations. Without any good plans, they had no tactics or arguments that they could use to get Reliant Chemical back on the negotiating table. They had underestimated the negotiating power of Reliant Chemical, and they also took the negotiations casually. This lack of forethought and planning made it difficult for them to make any meaningful negotiations, especially when Reliant Chemical had different strategies. They had made the wrong assumption that the talks would be about prices and that it would be over quickly. Due to lack of preparation and failure to consult with Reliant Company, they couldn't stand their ground and had no decisions on what issues they would concede. Another weakness that was evident with Fontaine and Gaudin was their lack of transparency. Their haste to have their contract signed quickly, they chose to reopen an agreement already in their favor. Reliant took the opportunity and asked for changes and additions to the contract. Pacific Oil overly gave in to Reliant and the demands that it was making. In their haste, they ended up giving away more company secrets to Reliant, and in the process, losing their negotiating capabilities (Naghavi & Mubarak, 2019). Question 2. Strengths and Weaknesses of Hauptmann's and Zinnser's Negotiation Strategy Strengths One of the advantages of Hauptmann's and Zinnser's strategy is that they had adequately planned and prepared for the negotiations. They had carried out adequate and exhaustive research on Pacific, and they were aware of the situation at Pacific Oil. The strategy they had planned and developed worked well to their advantage. They used a competitive strategy that worked to their benefit more than it did for Pacific Oil Company. Other than relying on their wit and intuition, they did their research into Pacific Oil. From 4 that research, they developed a strategy to front a strong negotiation with the Pacific. They were aware of the Pacific's situation, and they capitalized on it in their strategy, gaining the upper hand in the talks. Failure by Pacific to enforce any deadlines on the contract meant that reliant Chemical took the opportunity to win the upper hand. They stalled and delayed the negotiations for as long as they could. This tactic made it easy for them to secure concessions with every passing minute. Bec...

pacific oil company case study negotiation

24/7 Homework Help

Stuck on a homework question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic  math  to advanced rocket science !

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Similar Content

Related tags.

VP Debate networking Leadership Implementation Plan physics communication the job market communications Cengage Learning Contemporary Management situational awareness social media communication discussion

The Woman in the Window

by A. J. Finn

by Chaim Potok

Broke Millennial: Stop Scraping by and Get Your Financial Life Together

by Erin Lowry

Girl in Translation

by Jean Kwok

by J. R. R. Tolkien

Girl Stop Apologizing

by Rachel Hollis

The Secret Life of Bees

by Sue Monk Kidd

The Power of Habit - Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business

by Charles Duhigg

pacific oil company case study negotiation

working on a homework question?

Studypool, Inc., Tutoring, Mountain View, CA

Studypool is powered by Microtutoring TM

Copyright © 2023. Studypool Inc.

Studypool is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university.

Ongoing Conversations

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Access over 20 million homework documents through the notebank

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Get on-demand Q&A homework help from verified tutors

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Read 1000s of rich book guides covering popular titles

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Sign up with Google

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Sign up with Facebook

Already have an account? Login

Login with Google

Login with Facebook

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating Essay

Back in the days, petrochemical processes were determined by a detailed elaboration of prices known as formula prices, it comprised of several element. The first one being feed stock characteristics; feedstock supply varied in chemical composition.

We will write a custom Essay on Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating specifically for you for only $11.00 $9.35/page

807 certified writers online

The difference in the feedstock considerably affected the procedures of refining and operating efficiency. A few chemical products were drawn from a chosen feedstock. Increased number of orders necessitated the mixing of combined feedstock together with distinct structural characteristic.

Fuel cost was inclusive of price and quantity of energy that the manufacturing corporation expected in cracking, producing a particular steam and refining.

Labor cost was part of employees’ salary, to operate the manufacturing with the objective of generating a fixed unit amount of a particular product. Value of petrochemical was determined by the commodity cost, as the demand and supply fluctuated in the market; this factor was again featured in the formula price.

The computation of the price formula, as opposed to determining a market price had a list of advantages and disadvantages. It permitted the supplier to surpass expenses charged to buyer; this minimized the risks for the engaged parties, in the case of express fluctuation of prices throughout the period of the contract.

When market demands went down, contract guaranteed a wide market to the supplier; however, the price for the product was to some extent unbeneficial in comparison to product cost.

When it came to quantity, formula prices were typically computed, their major focus was given to quantity. Costs changed significantly, this was however dependent upon the efficiency of the production taking place. Payments were to be issued in dollars without deduction or discount, except only if noted.

Some of the challenges pacific oil faced in early 1985 with Reliant chemical company were quite a number. Pipelines routine inspection had been subcontracted to a company with quality equipment for monitoring things like leaks.

It happened that leaks had been detected in late December prior the year; this extended the effect to early 1985. The executive of the company were out of reach for many days hence the problem could not be solved immediately until a certain period of time.

There was a concern with the system of delivery, and the way meter reading was being conducted. Pacific oil built a line and was in charge of maintenance, installation of meters was done towards the outlet of the pipeline, and Reliant was giving metered total to Pacific.

According to Zinnser some spot checking at the manufacturing facility indicated that they were not getting all that they were billed for. They later discovered that, the integrity of the meter or the meter reader wasn’t question but, felt that since the pipes had been in existent for years, there was a possibility they had develop leaks.

The executive vice president became distressed over the turnout of events. Pacific headed for tremendous destruction. Realizing the techniques of challenging it would be to maintain strong negotiations, a review of the negotiations were done were done on Reliant contract.

They also experienced delay when Hauptmann lost his mother; meetings were rescheduled as a result hence, there was a delay. The investigation of pipeline gave no evidence of a considerable discharge. It only traced minor leaks, which did not seem serious. It was impossible to identify the percentage of the product lost in the process.

Emotion in negotiation is one of the styles used in the case. Emotions carries the capacity to contribute either positively or negatively in negotiation.contribute either positive or negative in a negotiation scenario. According to Fisher, and Shapiro (2005) negative emotion at times leads to intense or irrational behavior, resulting to escalation of conflict.

This is evident in the conversation that takes place between Kelsey and Fontaine as emotions flare an in turn leads to unhealthy and even unnecessary confrontation.Distributive negotiation is another style used; the term distributive basically means giving; or scattering things.

Fisher, and Shapiro (2005) further states that there is a limitation in things being distributed; it entails individuals who have never before had an interactive relationship.

And there isn’t a likelihood of doing so in the future. In this form we see each individual fighting to have their way; it is appropriate but, requires an extent of limit in order not to regard the other side as an enemy but a partner.

According to Shell, R.G. (2006) integrative negotiation means joining several parts and making the whole, this implies some cooperation or teaming up to achieve a common goal. More often than not, trust is of a higher degree in shaping of the relationship.

Both parties walking away feeling a sense of achievement, ideally the process has two phases. The process entails value concession, plus creative problem solving. This is the style that is mainly used by Guadin, Hauptmann, and Zinnser in their negotiations.

Instead of Kelsey allowing emotions to flare, what he could have recommended to Fontaine were few and simple facts.

The reality being that, a supply contract binds legally, it’s a document that only attempts to elaborate on strategies or ways the two companies can work together, and hence it is the foundation of an intricate long term relationship that exists between a seller and a buyer. He could have informed of the constant monitoring, discussion and evaluation required by representatives of the organizations.

He could have further recommended that it is possible for the purchaser to meet the conditions of the negotiated contract. This is can be made possible since the purchaser can accept a fair price formula, without attempting to push the supplier to an artificial low price. He is trustworthy pursue an action plan, basing it on sound business ethics as agreed in the contract.

The purchaser cannot take advantage of aberrations in the spot market, they will have no choice but accept the reality of a formula price having been negotiated, and both parties agreeing to live up to the negotiated contract over the suggested period of time.

Problems encountered in product quality, labor difficulties can result to challenges in manufacturing, unloading and loading, shipping and cleanliness of shipping tools. This can however be explored to mutual satisfaction.

Furthermore, change in business projection of both parties can be shared hence; the complexity anticipated by the supplier in producing the products can be solved. On the other hand the difficulty encountered by buyer in consumption of the product can also lead to amicable solution for both parties.

Finally, the ability to solve these problems necessitates mutual trust, open communication and honesty. And most importantly an approach that offers the best solution to both the parties.

Fisher,R. and Shapiro, D (2005) Beyond Reason: Using Emotions as You Negotiate .New York: Penguin Books.

Shell, R.G. (2006). Bargaining for advantage . New York: Penguin Books.

Need a custom Essay sample written from scratch by professional specifically for you?

IvyPanda. (2022, April 7). Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating.

IvyPanda. (2022, April 7). Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating. Retrieved from

"Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating." IvyPanda , 7 Apr. 2022,

1. IvyPanda . "Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating." April 7, 2022.


IvyPanda . "Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating." April 7, 2022.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating." April 7, 2022.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating'. 7 April. no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

paper cover thumbnail

The Pacific Oil Company

Profile image of Amornrat Pm

Related Papers

… Conflict Management and …

Biodun Obaju

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Muhammad Syaiful Rohman

Paul Gardiner

Abstract The management of conflict and change in construction projects is an important factor in determining the success of a project and the satisfaction of the client. Examples of project conflict and change have been collected in structured interviews within a series of organisations which are clients of construction activities. Five stages of conflict have been described and used as a basis to classify examples of conflict in particular projects.

Kevin DeCorla-Souza

Peter Donalek

tatiana mitrova , james henderson

Gas exports have historically provided a foundation of economic and political strength for Russia and a source of significant revenues for its leading gas company, Gazprom. However, lower commodity prices, the imposition of sanctions on Russia in light of the Ukraine crisis, lower gas demand in Europe, the EU’s desire to diversify away from Russian gas and increasing competition from new global LNG supply are presenting multiple challenges. A search for new markets in Asia, and especially China, has begun, but is currently not progressing as fast as Russia would have hoped, while domestically Gazprom’s position is being challenged by third parties who are keen to break the company’s export monopoly. This paper, jointly authored by James Henderson and Tatiana Mitrova, examines the emerging trends in Russia’s export strategy, identifying the key political drivers as well as the commercial factors that are influencing policy making. It analyses the catalysts behind Russia’s “pivot to Asia” in the gas sector, assesses the likelihood of this strategy being a success and argues that Europe will remain of vital importance as a major market for Russian gas for the foreseeable future. In light of this, the paper also examines Gazprom’s evolving gas marketing strategy and asks whether the company is adapting to the changes in European regulation and legislation in a positive manner. It considers the competitive position of Russian gas in Europe and Asia, delivered both by pipeline and by potential new LNG projects, and argues that Russian gas can have a pivotal role in both markets as its cost of supply is relatively low. Indeed, although it would currently appear that Gazprom’s strategy is being somewhat improvised in reaction to political and commercial events, the authors’ conclude that the company is gradually edging towards a more market-based outlook that could ultimately allow it to prosper even in a more competitive global gas market. It will need to continue this trend if it is to fend off competition from expanding global LNG supply but also from domestic competitors such as Novatek and Rosneft, who are keen to provide their own solutions to the challenges facing Russia’s gas export business.

Stephen R Nagy

Héctor Sulbarán

This PDF is about the theory behind Mr. Porter's Value Chain, specially how can someone manage it.

Sherpa Itpm

Arne Wiig , K. Murshid

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.


Adegbuyi Omotayo

Yulia Samareva


tatiana mitrova

Babanifesi AJETUNMOBI - Free Term Papers, Essays and Research Documents

The Research Paper Factory

Proc 5840 Pacific Oil Case Study

In: Business and Management

Case Study #2: Pacific Oil Company PROC 5840: Pacific Oil Case Study 30 Sep 2013 Abstract This paper assesses a negotiation between Pacific Oil Company, a seller of vinyl chloride monomer (VCM), and Reliant Chemical Company, a buyer of VCM. Each negotiation team’s strengths and weaknesses will be assessed. The Pacific Oil strengths included their negotiation team and the strength of the VCM market. Their weaknesses included poor organizational control, managerial decision making, and their failure to recognize the changing interests of Reliant Chemical and selection of a negotiation strategy. Reliant Chemical strengths were assessed as a strong organizational relationship and management decision making. It recognized, resolved and or reconciled the changing interests of Pacific Oil, derived the best approach for the negotiation, determined the relationship with the other negotiator(s), and selected the appropriate strategy and tactics. Reliant Chemical had one assessed weakness, which was its possible vulnerability to effective counter tactics. The paper concluded by providing a recommendation to close the negotiation with Reliant Chemical on more favorable terms to Pacific Oil. Introduction The Pacific Oil Company negotiation filled with examples of how people (Corporations, Management and Negotiator(s)) should prepare, interact and react during a negotiation. The negotiation for Pacific Oil had numerous challenges during the negotiation with Reliant Chemical. Those challenges will be assessed and discussed in this paper. Specifically, the paper will focus on the negotiation team perspectives, organizational structure of both companies, followed by their respective strengths and weaknesses, culminating in a recommended course of action for Pacific Oil to obtain a more equitable conclusion to the negotiation. Problems Pacific Oil faced during the renegotiation with Reliant Chemical Company. One of the most obvious challenges the Pacific Oil Company negotiation team faced was they viewed the whole endeavor as a “renegotiation” and NOT a negotiation, which resulted in a lack of preparation. Pacific Oil negotiated the first vinyl chloride monomer (VCM) contract with Reliant Chemical in 1979. Pacific Oil renegotiated the contract for a second time in February 1982. The contract renegotiation in 1982 was led by, Jean Fontaine. (Lewicki, Saunders and Barry 2010) To better understand Pacific Oil’s challenges, their previous contract negotiations need to be assessed as well as Reliant Chemical’s transformation. The Pacific Oil negotiation conducted in 1979, was a fairly standard contract for the industry and negotiated by each company’s European offices, who then reported back to their respective corporate headquarters in the U.S. (Lewicki et al. 2010) The success of the negotiation demonstrated the strategic importance of good communication from the negotiation team all the way up to their respective corporate offices. It appeared to be a collaborative (Win-Win) strategy for both companies based on the fact that both companies spoke very highly of their relationship and the outcome of the negotiation was considered to be equally important to both companies. The 1982 negotiation was a repeat of the 1979 negotiation and was again viewed as a success by both companies. (Lewicki et al. 2010) In December of 1984, during a Pacific Oil end of year review meeting, it was briefed that the market projections for VCM were going to change in favor of Reliant Chemical and other VCM buyers. It was at this meeting that Fontaine had decided to make an effort to re-sign all major VCM buyers to protect Pacific Oil from the projected market changes. The Pacific Oil negotiation strategy was to resign their buyers to avoid the increase in VCM supply, which was projected to occur between Sep 1986-July 1987 (20-30 Months). That was not a negotiation strategy, but a course of action. Pacific Oil also discussed entering into the polyvinyl chloride (PVC) manufacturing and distribution business. A decision to enter into the PVC business would position Pacific Oil in the VCM market as a buyer and put them in direct competition with Reliant Chemical. This pending decision was announced at the meeting, which meant it would eventually become public knowledge. To avoid complicating the negotiation a corporate decision concerning PVC needed to be made as quickly as possible. If a decision was not made quickly, then Pacific Oil would be perceived as “competitor” during the upcoming negotiations. This set the stage for the “Changes in Perspective” detailed in the case study. It was now inevitable the two companies would experience a change strategy. Due primarily to market projections, however, Pacific Oil’s pending decision to enter the PVC/VCM market as a buyer also contributed . Regardless of the underlying potential for change, each team attempted to get the best deal for their respective companies and should have anticipated challenges during the upcoming negotiation. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Strength and weaknesses of the Pacific Oil renegotiation team strategy with the Reliant Chemical negotiation team. Strengths 1. Renegotiating Team Cohesion and experience As noted in the case study, Jean Fontaine had been appointed Pacific Oil European Vice President sixteen months earlier and had been with Pacific Oil for a total of eleven years. He had a reputation as a strong, rising player in Pacific’s European operations. He also had experience negotiating the previous VCM contract with Reliant Chemical. Paul Gaudin, who was the junior member of the team, had only recently been appointed the European VCM marketing manager. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 2. Pacific Oil Company’s position in the VCM market as well as their business relationship with Reliant Chemical Company was strong. Fontaine and Gaudin actually formulated what they believed was a negotiation strategy as a result of the “Changed Perspective” that they received during the meeting in December 1984. They both realized an over supplied VCM market meant they needed to make a concerted effort to re-sign all of their major VCM customers in advance of the projections. They also realized Reliant Chemical would pursue a more favorable VCM price on the contract. Pacific Oil’s pending decision to enter the VCM market as a competitor, should have also weighed heavily on Fontaine and Gaudin’s preparation for their renegotiation with Reliant Chemical. As a result of the changing interests, whether a market projection or a change in relationship, Fontaine and Gaudin should have prepared for a more detailed and aggressive renegotiation with Reliant Chemical to ensure they obtained the best deal possible for Pacific Oil. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Weaknesses 1. Pacific Oil exercised poor organizational control between their U.S. based corporate headquarters and their European operations as well as poor decision making by the negotiation team. The case study characterization of the organizational relationships for both companies and the readings, “Managerial Decision Making” highlight challenges for Pacific Oil. (Lewicki et al. 2010) The case study described the previous contract negotiations, as “fairly standard one for the industry and that the contract was negotiated by Reliant’s purchasing managers in Europe, and the senior marketing managers of Pacific Oil’s European offices. Each of these individuals reported to the vice presidents in charge of their companies’ European offices, who in turn reported back to their respective corporate headquarters in the States.” (Lewicki et al. 2010) However, in 1985 Pacific Oil had shifted to a balanced functional matrix organization. This meant reporting organizations relationships were determined by business areas and regional operating divisions. (Lewicki et al. 2010) The matrix organization is designed to work best in the management of “large projects”, drawing its employees from different functional areas and disciplines for assignment to a team. This is accomplished without removing the employees from their respective positions. Employees report on their day-to-day performance to the project manager (Jean Fontaine) whose authority flows horizontally across corporate or departmental boundaries (Warren Meredith and Frank Kelsey). They also continue to report on their overall performance to the head of their department (Stan Saunders) whose authority flows vertically within his department. This aspect of the organization is hierarchical and is the only remnant of the previous Pacific Oil negotiations with Reliant Chemical. A balanced functional matrix organizational relationship requires the development of new support mechanisms, organizational culture and behavior patterns. The balanced functional matrix organization is the most difficult system to maintain and control because of the delicate task of the sharing of power. (Matrix structure 2013) This fundamentally changed the Pacific Oil “hierarchal” organizational relationship that had existed in the previous negotiations. It was obvious that Fontaine struggled with his communication and reporting responsibilities to both Meredith and Saunders. To highlight the changes in organizational relationships, the case study had a dedicated section concerning Frank Kelsey the Pacific Oil Strategic Planning Manager. This section pointed out Kelsey’s frustrations and challenges with his position and or relationship between Meredith and Fontaine. Kelsey had a background in chemistry and a wealth of experience in marketing, planning as well as research and development. Kelsey reported to the corporate Vice President of Marketing, Warren Meredith, and had an advisory or functional role to Fontaine. Fontaine as the VP for European operations reported directly to Stan Saunders, head of European operations. However, he also had a primary functional relationship with Warren Meredith. When Meredith had become concerned about the negotiation with Reliant Chemical he asked Kelsey to review the situation. Then when Fontaine asked Meredith for approval to give Reliant Chemical both the “favored nations” and “meet completion” clauses, Meredith recommended against it. Fontaine obviously disagreed, because several days later Saunders called Meredith and expressed his trust and confidence in Fontaine’s judgment and approved the granting of the clauses. This was a power sharing challenge as a result of Pacific Oil’s balanced functional matrix organizational structure. Saunders had the power to make decisions but had not been kept abreast of the status of the negotiation. Ultimately, it was Fontaine’s responsibility to keep Saunders apprised of the negotiations. Regardless, the balanced functional relationship that Meredith (Kelsey) shared with Fontaine (Saunders), excluded Meredith and Kelsey from making a management decision. (Lewicki et al. 2010) The second challenge, as noted in “Managerial Decision Making” and the decision making processes of the two cognitive systems that influence decision making. System 1 is characterized as fast, automatic, effortless and often an emotional process. This suggests the system relies on habit and is difficult to break. In contrast, system 2 is characterized as slow, controlled and requires effort, is rule-governed, and flexible. This suggests system 2 is a more “rational” decision making process. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Since negotiations are a decision-making process involving people that do not have the same desires and or preferences, the goal of a negotiation is not to simply reach an agreement. The goal of negotiations is to reach a good agreement. System 1 is clearly the system the Pacific Oil renegotiation team utilized for the majority of the negotiation. System 2 should have dominated Pacific Oil’s preparation for the negotiation and supported any System 1 decisions that may have come up. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 2. Pacific Oil Company negotiation teams “hidden assumptions” associated with Reliant Chemical. The biggest challenge that faced the Pacific Oil Company negotiation team was the perception of the negotiation as a “renegotiation”. Fontaine and Gaudin knew the market was going to change and Reliant Chemical would probably be negotiating for more favorable terms. Therefore, Fontaine and Gaudin correctly assumed Reliant Chemical would seek an adjustment to the “price” formula. Fontaine and Gaudin could have simply validated their assumption by asking additional questions, or utilizing hypothetical situations, “What if…” This is tactic called, “probing/testing”, which could have validated their “price” assumption. However, there “lack of preparation” and “over confidence” negated any use of tactics to ascertain Reliant’s intent and contributed significantly to Pacific Oil’s defensive position. (Lewicki, Saunders and Barry 2010) 3. Pacific Oil renegotiation teams’ failure to recognize, resolve and or reconcile the changing interests of Reliant Chemical before selecting the best approach for the Reliant Chemical renegotiation. “In resolving a dispute, the parties must focus their attention on one or more basic factors. They may seek to (1) reconcile their underlying interests…..” Interests underlie people’s positions—the tangible items they say they want.” It states further, “That reconciling interests are not easy. It involves probing for deep-seated concerns, devising creative solutions, and making trade-offs and concessions where interests are opposed.” The Pacific Oil negotiation team knew Reliant Chemical interests were going to change and failed to reconcile those interests. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 4. Pacific Oil Company negotiation teams’ failure to determine the relationship with the Reliant Chemical team negotiator(s) and the selection of a strategy. Selecting a strategy is a fundamental necessity in any negotiation. Unfortunately, Pacific Oil ignored basic negotiating fundamentals, which set the negotiation team up for a string of strategic errors. The five strategies, avoiding (lose-lose), accommodating (lose-win), competitive (win-lose), collaborative (win-win) and compromising (split the difference) depend upon two basic concerns: the relationship with the other negotiator and the outcome of the negotiation. Both Pacific Oil and Reliant Chemical had previously enjoyed a collaborative relationship. If Pacific Oil had prepared for the upcoming negotiation and reconciled Reliant Chemical’s interests, they would have assessed a shift in the relationship. In fact, based on available information, the appropriate assumption for the upcoming negotiation would have been a compromising or accommodating strategy for Pacific Oil and perhaps a more aggressive compromising strategy for Reliant Chemical. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 5. Pacific Oil negotiation teams’ failure to prepare for the Reliant Chemical negotiation based on the “changed perspective” in the market. It is easy to understand why the Pacific Oil negotiation team failed to prepare based on Pacific Oil’s “hidden assumption” of the renegotiation, i.e., being focused on a “price” formula. However, the Pacific Oil negotiation team should have taken a more systematic approach to their preparation for the negotiation. Negotiations: Readings, Exercises and Cases, Section 1.4, The Negotiation Checklist is a perfect example of a systematic approach to preparing for a negotiation. What are the issues? How important is each issue to you? What is your best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA)? What is the other side’s BATNA? What is the other side’s resistance point, if any? What is your target? What deadlines exist? Establish a timeline, agenda and have set meeting locations for negotiations. What are the future consequences of each strategy, tactic, or action you are considering and the reaction you might have on their actions? What do you know of the other party’s styles and tactics? What are the limits to the other party’s authority? Just to name a few. Pacific Oil’s lack of preparation drove them to a defensive negotiating position relative to Reliant Chemical. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 6. Pacific Oil negotiation team framed the negotiation thru loss aversion, over confidence and escalation of commitment, which allowed the Reliant Chemical to strengthen their negotiating position. Pacific Oil demonstrated a decision making biases, which involves what is called framing. Pacific Oil framed the negotiation through a bias of, “overconfidence”, “loss aversion” and “escalation of commitment”. The Pacific Oil negotiation team had a “hidden assumption” of a “renegotiation”, which naturally progressed into a bias of “overconfidence”. The “loss aversion” bias developed as Pacific Oil began to perceive the negotiation going backwards, or losing ground. Unfortunately, due to the lack of an overall strategy, avoiding the “loss aversion” bias would have been nearly impossible; however, being aware of its existence could have helped Pacific Oil make better decisions. For example, Fontaine and Gaudin had framed the negotiation around securing a contract in advance of the projected market changes in supply. In their rush to renegotiate, their “over confidence” coupled with their “loss aversion” as the negotiation continued to be prolonged by Reliant Chemical culminated in an “escalation commitment”. Again Pacific Oil’s failure to prepare drove them to an untenable defensive position. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 7. Pacific Oil negotiation team had anticipated a change in Reliant Chemical’s strategy, but failed to counter with the appropriate bargaining tactics, moves and techniques. Negotiation: Readings, Exercises and Cases specifically described the “Ten Hard-Bargaining Tactics” for negotiation teams to be on the lookout for during negotiations. The Reliant Chemical negotiating team (Zinnser and Hauptmann) utilized a minimum of four out of the ten tactics against Pacific Oil. These tactics seemed to continually keep the Pacific Oil team off balance. In fact, Pacific Oil was astonished by Reliant Chemical’s positions and never realized that their positions were actually tactics. Pacific Oil failed to recognize the overall Reliant course of action was incorporate numerous tactics and techniques to gain concessions from Pacific Oil. Reliant Chemical utilized the tactic of salami or “incrementalism”, which is the art of taking the negotiation and dividing it up into increments or slices. This tactic is especially useful in negotiations that can be divided up into negotiable elements, i.e., a contract. (Lewicki et al. 2010) The VCM contract negotiable elements were: price, quantity, product quality, contract duration, delivery point and credit terms. This coupled with Pacific Oil’s “overconfidence” and “escalation of commitment” would prove to be a very effective use of the “salami” tactic. Pacific Oil was completely unaware of Reliant Chemical’s use of the tactic. (Lewicki et al. 2010) For example, there were six separate uses of the “salami” tactic beginning in March 1985, when Pacific Oil’s negotiating team met with the Reliant negotiating team to discuss the VCM “price” formula. This was followed up in May 1985, when Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, met with Pacific Oil negotiator, Gaudin, to discuss commitment to a “contract” renewal. Then again in August 1985, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, met with Pacific Oil negotiator, Gaudin, to accept to a three year “contract” renewal. Then again in September 1985, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, met with Pacific Oil’s negotiator’s, Fontaine and Gaudin, and negotiated minimum “quantity” requirements. And again in November 1985, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, again met with Pacific Oil negotiator, Gaudin, and agreed to a minimum “quantity” requirement. Then finally, as a “fait accompli”, in Febrarary 1986, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, presented two clauses that he said both he and Zinnser had formulated. Because the tactic fit so well into the negotiable elements of the contract, Pacific Oil was unaware of the tactic and never countered with a restorative move during the negotiation. Another tactic that Pacific Oil failed to counter was the use of “forbearance”, sometimes referred to as “waiting in haste”. This strategy is not utilized by those who are in a hurry to close a negotiation; in fact, this strategy has a tendency to provoke frustration and anger in an opponent who is in a hurry, i.e., Pacific Oil. In the Pacific Oil negotiation, each physical meeting was consistently spaced two to three months apart. This had the effect of dragging the negotiation out to allow Reliant Chemical to extract as much information as possible, while validating assumptions and magnifying the effects of their tactics. (Lewicki et al. 2010) From the onset of negotiation in December 1984, and each successive meeting, February 1985, March 1985, May 1985, August 1985, September 1985, November 1985, December 1985, January 1986, February 1986 effectively delayed the negotiations to maximize the tactics being employed by Reliant and the framing elements effecting Pacific Oil, i.e, “over confidence”, “loss aversion” and “escalation commitment”. Reliant Chemical utilized “surprise” effectively on four different occasions. The intent was to make their negotiating position less predictable, so Pacific Oil was less confident in their assumptions and or demands. Therefore, each time Reliant Chemical brought up items for discussion beyond Pacific Oil’s “hidden assumption” of “price” it seemed to throw the Pacific Oil team off balance, which contributed significantly to the lack of restorative moves/turns by Pacific Oil. (Lewicki et al. 2010) The first example of the use of “surprise” was in March 1985, Pacific Oil’s negotiating team met with the Reliant Chemical negotiating team to discuss the contract VCM “price” formula. Reliant proposed a rather elaborate method for adjusting the coefficients of the formula factors. Pacific Oil was able to work thru the formula changes but it was an “exception” to the normal process. The next meeting in September 1985, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, met with both Pacific Oil’s negotiator’s Fontaine and Gaudin, and negotiated the minimum “quantity” requirements. Fontaine and Gaudin were “surprised” by the conservative VCM projections that Reliant Chemical was utilizing. In December 1985, Pacific Oil’s negotiating team met again with Reliant negotiating team to discuss how the delivery pipeline was being metered. This too caught Pacific Oil by surprise, especially since they had no indication that there was even a problem with the pipeline. The final use of “surprise” was in February 1986, when Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, presented two clauses for consideration and was definitely an exception to the normal negotiation process. Once again the Pacific Oil team was caught off guard. Reliant Chemical also utilized a common tactic called, “probing/testing”. It is a tactic designed to gain information and leverage their position during negotiations. It can also be used to validate “assumptions” and setup appropriate follow on tactics or moves. In December 1985, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Zinnser, stated that they had become concerned about the way the Pacific Oil delivery pipeline was being metered. According to Reliant Chemical, a preliminary inspection had raised concerns they were paying for VCM they were not receiving. Although there was no evidence to support Zinnser’s claims, he refused to address any other negotiation items until this concern was resolved. Reliant Chemical’s probe/test of the metering concerns was an outstanding use of the tactic. It had an element of “surprise”, but was intended to validate the assumption of Pacific Oil’s “escalation of commitment”. Ultimately, it also set up the follow on move of the “fait accompli” with the “favored nations” and “meet competition” clauses. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Pacific Oil also failed to notice Reliant Chemical’s use of the tactic of an “agent of limited authority”. This allowed the Reliant Chemical team members to claim to be an agent of lesser authority during negotiations, which meant they did not have the authority to make a decision without their principal’s concurrence. This effectively allowed Reliant Chemical time to gather additional information before formulating a decision while continuing to employ other tactics such as “forbearance” and “surprise”. Reliant Chemical utilized this tactic on numerous occasions to delay decisions to enhance their tactics and support their overall strategy. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Examples include the December 1984 meeting when Pacific Oil negotiator, Gaudin, had contacted and then met with Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, concerning a contract extension beyond December 1987. Hauptmann responded by saying, “that he would consider the offer but needed to consult with “other people” in Brussels as well as senior executives at corporate headquarters in Chicago.” This was the first use of “limited authority” and may have seemed reasonable at the onset of negotiations, but it set a precedent for Reliant Chemical. In September 1985, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, met with both Pacific Oil’s negotiator’s, Fontaine and Gaudin, and negotiated aggressively concerning the conservative projections that Reliant Chemical had applied to the minimum quantity requirements. Hauptmann again departed the meeting stating the he needed to consult with Zinnser and others in Brussels and the states. This effectively delayed a decision and enhanced Reliant Chemical’s overall strategy. And finally, in January 1986, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, said “that as far as he was concerned, all issues had been settled; however, he thought Zinnser might have one or two issues to raise.” Again utilizing the “agent of limited authority” to set up a negotiation within a negotiation. The final tactic utilized by Reliant Chemical was a tactic called a “fait accompli”. This tactic is normally considered a risky move, however, within the context of Reliant Chemical’s overall strategy and the predictable decision making of Pacific Oil it made sense. A “fait accompli” forced Pacific Oil to act on the request. Reliant Chemical had executed their overall strategy consistently thru out the negotiation and even validated their assumptions with the VCM pipeline “probe/test”, which set up their “fait accompli”. The “fait accompli” was executed during the Feb 1986, Reliant Chemical negotiator, Hauptmann, presented the two clauses, the first of which was the “favored nations” clause that Hauptmann argued was to protect Reliant Chemical. The second was the “meet competition” clause, which he argued was advantageous to Pacific Oil. Hauptmann also suggested that if Pacific Oil did not agree to the clauses then perhaps they were not as interested in a long-term relationship as they had been advocating. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Strength and weaknesses of Reliant Chemical negotiation team strategy with Pacific Oil. Strengths 1. Reliant Chemical has strong organizational relationship within its European operations with direct management oversight thru to its corporate headquarters. The organizational relationships for Reliant Chemical and Pacific Oil for the negotiating teams that participated in the 1979 and 1982 contract negotiations, was described as a “fairly standard contract and negotiation for the industry. The contracts were negotiated by Reliant’s purchasing managers in Europe, headquartered in Brussels, and the senior marketing managers of Pacific Oil’s European offices, located in Paris. Each of these individuals reported to the vice presidents in charge of their companies’ European offices, who in turn reported back to their respective corporate headquarters in the States.” There was a single line of communication and management oversight was consistent. This was ensured because all three levels of management decision making was hierarchal and consistent thru the strategic (corporate), operational (European operations) and tactical (negotiation team)) to ensure the company goals and objectives were consistent. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 2. Reliant Chemical negotiation team recognized, resolved and or reconciled the changing interests of Pacific Oil Company before selecting the best approach for the Reliant Chemical negotiation. “In resolving a dispute, the parties must focus their attention on one or more of the basic factors. They may seek to (1) reconcile their underlying interests…..” It involves probing, for deep-seated concerns, devising creative solutions, and making trade-offs and concessions where interests are opposed.” Reliant Chemical negotiation team (Zinnser and Hauptmann) reconciled their interests and it was reflected in the execution of their strategic and tactical courses of action. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 3. Reliant Chemical negotiation team determined the relationship with the other negotiator(s) and the outcome of the negotiation itself, and selected a strategy and tactics prior to going into the negotiation with Pacific Oil Company. Selecting a strategy is a fundamental necessity for any negotiating team. The five strategies, avoiding (lose-lose), accommodating (lose-win), competitive (win-lose), collaborative (win-win) and compromising (split the difference) depend upon two basic concerns: the relationship with the other negotiator and the outcome of the negotiation itself. Reliant Chemical and Pacific Oil enjoyed a collaborative relationship, but the market had favored Pacific Oil in the past negotiations. Reliant Chemical negotiation team, Zinnser and Hauptmann, reconciled Pacific Oil’s interests and then assessed their relationship with the that of the opposing negotiator as well as the outcome of the negotiation. Reliant Chemical had stated that they had a collaborative relationship with Pacific Oil; however, their assessment had shifted to an aggressive compromising strategy. (Lewicki et al. 2010) 4. Reliant Chemical negotiation team demonstrated that they had prepared for the negotiation, by maintaining a consistent strategy thru the validation of assumptions and a repetitive series of tactical decisions. The Reliant Chemical negotiating team strategy and tactics represents their primary strength in the negotiation with Pacific Oil. Their selected tactics are discussed in detail as part of Pacific Oil’s weakness to recognize and counter Reliant Chemical’s tactics. (See Pacific Oil Weakness number 7, Pg 11) Weaknesses 1. Reliant Chemical gains were obtained from their use of negotiation strategy and tactics and NOT entirely as a result of the “Changed Perspective” in the market, which means they could be vulnerable to “Restorative Moves and Turns”. Based on Pacific Oil’s renegotiation team’s performance it is unlikely their overall position will change and Reliant Chemical’s position is relatively secure. (Lewicki et al. 2010) What negotiation action(s) should Pacific Oil take to resolve the case? The Pacific Oil negotiation team lead, Jean Fontaine, needs to immediately implement changes in his communications with Pacific Oil management (Balanced Functional Matrix organizational) to ensure the negotiation is more favorable to Pacific Oil and protect his position in the company for the remainder of the Reliant Chemical negotiation. The Pacific Oil negotiation team also needs to make several strategic move(s) to restore the balance or equity in the negotiations. This is to address the obvious advantage that Reliant Chemical negotiation team has obtained in the last thirteen months of negotiations. The original contract expiration is December 1987 and Pacific Oil has twenty two months to secure a more favorable contract extension with the Reliant Chemical negotiation team. Twenty two months shouldn’t be required based on the new strategy but it is important to note they have time. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Pacific Oil management structure (balanced functional matrix organizational issues) and the proposed closing negotiation strategy First, Fontaine should call Frank Kelsey to propose a closing negotiation strategy and management decision process. The proposal should include the following: Pacific Oil will continue with a positive collaborative strategy towards Reliant Chemical. However, Pacific Oil should be prepared to utilize any of the following strategies: competitive, compromising, accommodating and or avoiding when dealing with individual contract items to ensure negotiations with Reliant Chemical conclude with Pacific Oil in a more equitable position. Pacific Oil should initiate a “strategic move” to reposition its negotiation team. This strategic move will be to request a formal closing negotiation with Reliant Chemical. Since this hadn’t occurred in previous negotiations, if Reliant Chemical questions the reason for the formal closing, Pacific Oil should state since the company reorganization in 1985, corporate headquarters requires a formal closing negotiation on all contracts. This tactic will allow Pacific Oil to introduce an arbitrator/mediator (Kelsey or a third party, if Reliant Chemical objects) into the negotiation process. This is a “restorative turn” to ensure the Pacific Oil negotiation lead maintains a credible role in the negotiation and Kelsey adds to the strength of the team. The “restorative turn” may put Reliant Chemical on the defensive; therefore “participative turns” will also be critical to ensure Reliant Chemical continues to view itself as a partner. The will allow Pacific Oil the ability to structure and control the closing negotiations by selecting a time, location, duration and setting an agenda, etc., while allowing Pacific Oil to regroup and establish a BATNA, Resistant Point, Target and other neglected elements their negotiating position. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Formal closing negotiations will allow Pacific Oil negotiating team (Kelsey, Fontaine and Gaudin) to utilize a wider range of tactics. These tactics will allow Pacific Oil to revisit issues and continue to negotiate more favorable terms. One technique would be to “summarize” the issues and emphasize selected concessions that Pacific Oil had agreed to. Linkage of these concessions can be very helpful in leveraging concessions from Reliant Chemical. Closing individual issues and or the entire contract by “splitting the difference” can also be utilized. (Lewicki et al. 2010) To ensure the Reliant Chemical negotiation team does not become too defensive, Pacific Oil should also use a number of channels of persuasion. Pacific Oil should rely on the following persuasions to further its goals and objectives. The first is, Channel #1: Interest Based Persuasion should be utilized to ensure Pacific Oil addresses Reliant Chemical’s underlying needs. Second, Channel #4 Rationality should be applied when trying to influence Reliant Chemical’s attitudes, beliefs or actions and offer reasons and or evidence to justify a proposal on its merits. And finally, Pacific Oil should continue to focus on the collaborative relationship with Reliant Chemical. Therefore, Channel #6 Relationships to stress the use of similarity, liking, rapport, and reciprocity to maintain open doors as part of an idea-selling strategy is necessary. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Second, if Frank Kelsey concurs, then call or meet with Stan Saunders to brief him on the change in strategy and tactics. Stan Saunders should not be opposed to the changes, since he is already on record with Warren Meredith that he trusts Fontaine’s judgment in doing what’s right for Pacific Oil. Also, have Frank Kelsey call Warren Meredith to brief him on the change in strategy. Third, if Stan Saunders and Warren Meredith concur, then arrange a teleconference with Frank Kelsey, Warren Meredith and Stan Saunders to establish a new method of reporting for the Pacific Oil negotiation team with Frank Kelsey acting as a mediator/arbitrator, or a third party. Set up mandatory conference calls prior to and after each negotiation session to ensure both Warren Meredith and Stan Saunders are aware of the negotiation team progress. Also, at the February 1986 meeting, Fontaine had deferred the “favored nations” and “meet competition” clauses to confer with corporate headquarters. Fontaine should instruct Gaudin to inform Reliant Chemical that he was requested to travel to Pacific Oil corporate headquarters to discuss the formal contract closing negotiation process. Gaudin should frame the reason for Fontaine’s travel to corporate as a result of the recent restructuring of the Pacific Oil organization to reflect a matrix organization and that he anticipates: a. Formal closing negotiations with corporate representation (Probably Frank Kelsey, Corporate Strategic Planning). b. The reorganization and formal closing negotiations, although never conducted before, is consistent with the public reorganization of Pacific Oil to a matrix based organization. Although this will certainly be a “surprise” to Reliant Chemical it probably won’t be challenged and sets up the introduction of the formal closing negotiation process and an arbitrator/mediator (Frank Kelsey’s involvement). Strategically, that should give the Pacific Oil negotiation team several weeks to continue to refine their new strategy and tactics proposed by Fontaine during the teleconference. (Lewicki et al. 2010) Conclusion The number of variables associated with the Pacific Oil and Reliant Chemical negotiation was as diverse as most human interactions. As a result, negotiation preparation and subsequent communication of a strategy, tactics/techniques cannot be understated. The Pacific Oil case study allowed for an in depth look at the fundamentals of negotiation from the basis of determining the “interests” of the other side, to assessing and determining your own. Once the “interests” were determined then the appropriate strategy, tactics/techniques should have been selected to obtain those respective goals and objectives. The actual negotiation between Pacific Oil and Reliant Chemical was a reflection of each negotiator’s knowledge of the other interests, and how well you knew your own interests, punctuated with tactics (moves and turns) as well as techniques. All required to accomplish your individual strategy “course of action” to obtain your goals and objectives. (Lewicki et al. 2010) References Krulak, C.C., et al, (1997). The Theory of War, MCDP 1, Warfighting (pp. 28-30), HQMC Washington D.C.: Department of the Navy. Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M., Barry, B., (2010). Negotiation: Readings, Exercises and Cases, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Matrix Organization. (n.d.) Retrieved September 14 2013 from Website: Matrix Structure. (n.d.) Retrieved September 14 2013 from Website: organization.html#ixzz2eyDhxmX4 Sun Tzu. (n.d.) Retrieved September 7. 2013, from Website:

Similar Documents

Havard negotiation.

...Concourse | Negotiations W EBSTER UNIVERSITY • JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA-BOLLING • GEORGE HERBERT W ALKER SCHOOL OF BUSINESS & TECHNOLOGY • MANAGEMENT NEGOTIATIONS PROC-5840 3 Credits 01/07/2013 to 03/09/2013 Section 34 S1 2013 Modified 12/05/2012 MEETING TIMES Saturdays - 8:00am-12:00pm CONTACT INFORMATION Monica Y. Watts, MBA Email: [email protected] Phone: 202-344-2938 Fax: 202-344-1254 Preferred contact method: Email DESCRIPTION The course involves scope, strategies, and objectives related to negotiated acquisitions. The preparation, conduct, and documentation of the negotiation process are included. Requisites None OBJECTIVES The following is a list of the basic learning outcomes for the course: Identify the strategies, tactics, and skills needed to successfully negotiate an agreement/contract in industry or the federal government. Compare and contrast negotiation process in industry and the federal government. Acquire a working knowledge of the negotiation process that includes planning, closure and documentation. Perform a series of negotiation exercises that will allow the student to apply hands-on negotiation strategies, techniques, and tactics used in industry and the federal government to ensure successful negotiation outcomes (win-win). OUTCOMES The following is a list of the learning outcomes for the course: Graduates will know and explain the important......

Words: 3109 - Pages: 13

Popular Essays

Hamburger menu

"Pacific oil company case negotiation" Essays and Research Papers

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Pacific Oil Company Failed Negotiation

of Fontaine’s and Gaudin’s negotiating strategy in their deliberations with Reliant Chemical Company . Fontaine and Gaudin started off with a competitive strategy‚ wherein the outcome of the negotiation was more important than the relationship. This is evidenced by the fact that the market for VCM would be oversupplied in a few years due to the building of new chemical plants and a drop in demand. Pacific only needed to secure an extension from Reliant to enable them to maintain operations for just

Premium Negotiation Contract Time

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Pacific Oil Company

Pacific Oil Company Pacific Oil Company was founded in 1902 as the Sweetwater Oil Company of Oklahoma City‚ Oklahoma. The founder of Sweetwater Oil ‚ E.M. Hutchinson‚ pioneered a major oil strike in north central Oklahoma that touched off the Oklahoma "black gold" rush of the early 1900s. It developed extensive oil holdings in North Africa and the Middle East‚ as well as significant coal beds in the western United States. In 1979‚ Pacific Oil established the first major contract with

Premium Polyvinyl chloride Contract Gentlemen's agreement

pacific oil company case study negotiation

strengths and weaknesses of Fontaine’s and Gaudin’s negotiating strategy in their deliberations with Reliant Chemical Company . How effectively did Fontaine and Gaudin approach the negotiation ? Answer: Fontaine’s or Gaudin’s had good bargaining techniques. In my opinion these employees did not have enough time on the job‚ experience or in the business Their preparation for negotiations with Relient was inadequate. Adequate preparation should include careful study of strengths and weakness of both

Premium Negotiation Collective bargaining

Week 3 Case Study Pacific Oil Company

The case study on Pacific Oil Company shows from beginning to end the role of power in the outcome of a negotiation . From the beginning‚ the problem that Pacific Oil Company faced as it reopened negotiations with Reliant Chemical Company was that they did not assert the power necessary to really end up with the outcome of the negotiation they were hoping for. The case study points out several factors that Pacific Oil Company is trying to achieve in the contract negotiations with Reliant Chemical

Premium Negotiation Contract

Oil Company

The Pacific Oil Company “Look‚ you asked for my advice‚ and I gave it to you‚” Frank Kelsey said. “If I were you‚ I wouldn’t make any more concessions! I really don’t think you ought to agree to their last demand! But you’re the one who has to live with the contract‚ not me!” Static on the transatlantic telephone connection obscured Jean Fontaine’s reply. Kelsey asked him to repeat what he had said. “OK‚ OK‚ calm down‚ Jean. I can see your point of view. I appreciate the pressures you’re under

Premium Contract Petroleum Supply and demand

Case Study: Rosneft Oil Company

Rosneft Oil Company Introduction: Rosneft is one of the world’s largest petroleum companies and it’s the leader of Russia’s petroleum business. Rosneft actions contain hydrocarbon examination and construction‚ hydrocarbon refining‚ upstream offshore projects‚ and crude oil ‚ gas and product marketing in Russia and many other countries. Rosneft Company is a leader in the development of extraordinary quality reconstruction and innovational modifications in the petroleum trade of Russia. Rosneft

Premium Petroleum Russia

Oil And Gas Company Case Study

should government of an oil or gas-producing nation seek advice from outsider on how its oil or gas reserves should be developed and the resulting revenues should be used? Fiscal management is one of any government’s sovereign functions. However‚ not all governments have the capability to effectively manage its own revenue generation and revenue flows. At some point‚ outsiders must be sought for guidance and advice‚ especially in the case of a government that found its first oil /gas reserve and had no

Premium Petroleum Public finance Government

Mearl Oil Company Case Summary

Mearl oil company case review The case is about a manager environmental support system of Mearl Oil Company named Leslie Milne which noticed that there are serious potential environmental and health hazard problems in areas which industrial facilities were discharging wastewater into open ditches. According to this discovery‚ company made a memorandum of wastewater discharge‚ environment and health standard to all Mearl subsidiaries which were then called by Environmental Impact Targets (EITs)

Premium Law United States Petroleum

Case Analysis - Negotiations

Pacific Oil Company I. Introduction a. Summary of the Problem • Pacific Oil Company ‚ previously known as the Sweet Water Oil Company ‚ started out in 1902 as a pioneering venture of an oil business in the north central Oklahoma‚ USA. It went through a series of expansion and acquisition first in 1920s and 1930s‚ Hutchinson renamed it Pacific Oil Company . Pacific is also a leading manufacturer of industrial petrochemical raw materials‚ with some of these products being made by very few

Premium Negotiation Petroleum Contract

Cathay Pacific Company Report

External Influences 3.0 Evaluation 4.0 Cathay Pacific vs. British Airways 6.0 References Abstract CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD. Address: Cathay Pacific City‚ 8 Scenic Road‚ Hong Kong International Airport‚ Hong Kong. Website: The following report‚ comprising of secondary research found from numerous different sources will address the organisational profile of the Hong Kong based airline‚ Cathay Pacific . An organisational profile will be constructed detailing

Premium Cathay Pacific Airline Hong Kong

report in oil company

role is played by industry in which company operates. During my studies‚ I have noticed that oil companies are frequently used as examples of different models‚ due to specifics of the business. Particularly‚ the three models that this report is focused on – Event Process Chain‚ Data Flow Diagram and Entity-Relationship Diagram are commonly used in oil industry. Considering amount of data‚ its flow and relationships between different sets of data at oil companies ‚ Data Flow Diagram and Entity-Relationship

Premium Flowchart Decision theory Decision making

Negotiation Case

Negotiation Case A Free Trade Agreement between USA and EU I will analyze a negotiation between these two great powers who can be said to be equals in terms of trade‚ where they negotiate a free trade agreement with each other. Both parties have different interests however‚ they are likely to reach a consensus when it comes to increasing trade which will lead to enormous economic development as well as other important economic improvements on both sides of the ocean. The main issues in this agreement

Premium International trade European Union Europe

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Pacific Medical Supply Company

PACIFIC MEDICAL SUPPLY COMPANY | Case 6 | | Submitted to | Samy AhmedFaculty Member: MKT 445Sales Management | Submitted by | Medhad Nasser Chowdhury082735530Section : 01 | 3/24/2013 | Case Background Pacific Medical Supply Company was a prominent supplier in the southern California region. They used to supply medical instruments and all other itineraries using a distribution channel consisting of sales commission based Sales force. Jim Shine‚ the owner of Pacific Medical‚ started

Premium Sales Marketing

Post- Negotiation Analysis For The Paradise Project In this case ‚ I was playing the role of chief project manager of the Paradise Project‚ and I was negotiating with my Manager of Artistic Design (Angel) and Manager of Client Contracts and Customer Relations (Elion) in order to resolve the conflict between each of them. Overall‚ I was satisfied with the final agreement‚ which paid 3‚000 more pesos to Angel and ensured that he would change the color of the tiles and finish the job before the deadline

Premium Contract Negotiation

Negotiation case

Assignment #4 - Negotiation case As we are two exchange students from Spain and Israel‚ we have experienced a common situation when we arrived to Brandeis University this semester for an exchange programme in IBS. Therefore‚ the following case situation is real and it includes the real names of the characters who took part in the story. You are very welcome‚ of course‚ to change the names in case you want to use it for your future classes. Character #1 – The new exchange student Jose is a

Premium University Student exchange program International student

Company Profile of Pacific Coffee

The idea of Pacific Coffee was inspired by the coffee culture of Seattle‚ where coffeehouses were community hubs‚ serving great Italian espresso based coffee in generous western culture sizes‚ with informality and a friendly attitude. Pacific Coffee is one of the leading coffee chains in Hong Kong‚ with retail outlets in Hong Kong‚ China and Singapore. Since opening its first outlet in 1992‚ the chain has played an instrumental role in bringing a coffee drinking culture to Hong Kong.With comfortable

Premium Coffee Hong Kong Mainland China

Case Study: Premier Oil Company

Stearic acid Cost: Price - $1‚600/1000 kgs. FOB USA Sea Freight Cost - $1‚800 per container van (1‚000 bags @ 25kg. per bag) Fixed Ordering Cost – Php 3‚000 per shipment Custom Duty – 10% based on C&F cost Land transport cost from port to company – Php 5‚000 per container van Exchange rate – Php 26/ 1$ Order Size : 3‚000 bags Ave. Shipping time: 30 days Release from Customs: 30 days Substitute: Hydrogenated Castor Wax 15% by weight required to produce the same quantity of grease Hydrogenated

Premium Transport Kilogram Cargo

Analysis Case Study: Shell Oil Company

Royal Dutch Shell Oil Company involving their monumental proposed investment into their Nigerian operations. When global companies experience extreme criticism such as Shell‚ they are usually tasked with identifying optimum solutions to reverse the negativity. In addition to assessing the challenges‚ this analysis provides some potential strategies that can be implemented to resolve the issues within this case . Problem Statement Royal Dutch Shell Oil Company proposed to execute

Premium Royal Dutch Shell Petroleum Nigeria

Oil and Gas Company Case Study: ExxonMobil

publicly traded oil and gas producing company . ExxonMobil does business in 200 countries world-wide (1). Some countries are designated for exploring gas and petroleum‚ and some are designated for manufacturing chemicals‚ lubricants‚ and market fuels (1). ExxonMobil ’s world-class petroleum portfolio gives access to proven reserves of 21.9 billion oil -equivalent barrels of oil and gas‚ which is the highest in the industry (1). The company ’s discovered resources consist of 72 billion oil equivalent

Premium Petroleum

pacific oil company case study negotiation

Pacific Systems Case

1. What is your recommended sourcing strategy in this case ? Please support your decision with quantitative and qualitative evidence gathered during the case analysis. Also‚ present your plan to reduce any risks associated with your sourcing decision. Pacific Systems Company should single source their DVD drives and build a good relationship with the chosen supplier. Not only computer industry is hungry for DVDs‚ other electronic sectors such as home entertainment devices

Premium Risk Risk management Total cost


  1. 1901 Grand Pacific Oil Company Stock Certificate CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA

    pacific oil company case study negotiation

  2. 😀 Pacific oil company case study answers. Negotiating. 2019-02-13

    pacific oil company case study negotiation

  3. List of the 12 Best Petroleum Company Logos

    pacific oil company case study negotiation

  4. Pacific Oil Company 1904

    pacific oil company case study negotiation


    pacific oil company case study negotiation

  6. Negotiation Case Study

    pacific oil company case study negotiation


  1. Jkpsi update|jkpsi results|Aptech company case status

  2. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserves

  3. Instead of strategic petroleum reserve, Let’s call it the political petroleum reserve

  4. Fuyao Glass Company Case study. Presented by Sumit Gawas, Rahul Verma, Niyati Parakh

  5. Oil Companies are Engaging in Class Warfare

  6. Northbound Union Pacific Oil Train


  1. The 10 Top U.S. Oil Companies

    The United States is not one of the top 10 richest countries, notes Business Insider. However, several large oil companies are headquartered here. Oil plays an important role in the economy of some of the richest countries, and oil is big i...

  2. What Is a Case Study?

    When you’re performing research as part of your job or for a school assignment, you’ll probably come across case studies that help you to learn more about the topic at hand. But what is a case study and why are they helpful? Read on to lear...

  3. Why Are Case Studies Important?

    Case studies are important because they help make something being discussed more realistic for both teachers and learners. Case studies help students to see that what they have learned is not purely theoretical but instead can serve to crea...

  4. Pacific Oil company

    Essay running head: contract negotiation pacific oil company case study student name institution affiliation note contract negotiation pacific oil company.

  5. Essay on Pacific Oil Company

    Pacific Oil Case Study Analysis. The lack of detailed planning in the case of Pacific Oil Company's (POC) negotiation of a new contract with Reliant had dire

  6. Pacific Oil Company Failed Negotiation Essay example

    The case study on Pacific Oil Company shows from beginning to end the role of power in

  7. Pacific Oil Case Study Questions And Sample Answers

    The complications that Pacific Oil Company confronted as it reopened discussions with Reliant Chemical Company in early 1985 When Pacific

  8. Pacific Oil and Reliant Negotiations by David Nguyen

    How effectively did Fontaine and Gaudin approach the negotiation? I don't think Pacific should give in to the favored nations and meet competition clauses. A

  9. The Pacific Oil Case: Conflict Management and Negotiation

    Paul Gaudin and Jean Fontaine negotiated a favorable contract for Pacific Oil Company in 1982 with Reliant Chemical Company. Gaudin and Fontaine prepared well

  10. SOLUTION: Pacific Oil Company Case Study

    Read the case study and answer these questions 1.Identify the strengths and weaknesses of Fontaine's and Gaudin's negotiating strategy in their

  11. Pacific Oil Company: Bargaining and Negotiating Essay

    It permitted the supplier to surpass expenses charged to buyer; this minimized the risks for the engaged parties, in the case of express

  12. (DOC) The Pacific Oil Company

    2 CASE STUDY Discussion Question Describe the problem that Pacific Oil Company faced as it reopened negotiations with Reliant Chemical Company in early 1985

  13. Proc 5840 Pacific Oil Case Study

    The Pacific Oil strengths included their negotiation team and the strength of the VCM market. Their weaknesses included poor organizational control, managerial

  14. Pacific oil company case negotiation Free Essays

    The case study points out several factors that Pacific Oil Company is trying to achieve in the contract negotiations with Reliant Chemical.