Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum (ICLEF)

Help Your Team Stay on Message
Written by Marty Latz, Latz Negotiation Institute

Last week on NBC’s “Meet the Press” television program, Vice President Joe Biden declared his support for gay marriage, a position subsequently endorsed by President Obama.  Political analysts have since questioned whether Biden’s comment was a purposeful attempt to test voters’ feelings about the issue or an off-the-cuff remark which forced the president’s hand.

A recent Harvard Program on Negotiation post addressed how to prevent a negotiation team member from going off message.  Their advice?  First, spend twice as much time planning as you expect to spend negotiating to allow your team to resolve any differences in advance.  Be sure to brainstorm the issues to be discussed as well as your goals and alternatives.  And think about the same issues from your counterpart’s perspective.

Second, practice your negotiation script in advance with the purpose of attempting to direct and control any unpredictable team members.  And have a plan for what to do if someone does start to go off script during the negotiation.

______________________________________________________________________

Marty Latz is the founder of Latz Negotiation Institute, a national negotiation training and consulting company, and ExpertNegotiator, a Web-based software company that helps managers and negotiators more effectively negotiate and implement best practices based on the experts’ proven research.  He is also the author of Gain the Edge! Negotiating to Get What You Want (St. Martin’s Press 2004). He can be reached at 480-951-3222 or Latz@ExpertNegotiator.com

Instagram’s Leverage
Written by Marty Latz, Latz Negotiation Institute

As a follow up to our recent blog post, The Power of “No,” in which we pointed out the importance of timing in the context of Facebook’s purchase of Instagram, a subsequent report about the deal also brings to light the importance of creating alternatives as a way to maximize your leverage.

The report claims Instagram CEO, Kevin Systrom “used a pending funding round with Sequoia and Greylock to pressure Twitter to make an offer” but then “did not sign the offer, said to be in the range of ‘hundreds of millions of dollars.’  With the financing round still pending and the Twitter offer in his pocket,” he then “went to Zuckerberg (Facebook’s CEO) to see about a better deal.”

This is a textbook example of improving your leverage by taking concrete steps to create alternatives and turning them into practical possibilities.  By having an offer from Twitter on the table, Systrom was in a much stronger bargaining position with Zuckerberg, who obviously didn’t want the app to wind up in the hands of a key competitor.  I wonder if Systrom took the Facebook offer back to Twitter to give them a chance to beat it?

______________________________________________________________________

Marty Latz is the founder of Latz Negotiation Institute, a national negotiation training and consulting company, and ExpertNegotiator, a Web-based software company that helps managers and negotiators more effectively negotiate and implement best practices based on the experts’ proven research.  He is also the author of Gain the Edge! Negotiating to Get What You Want (St. Martin’s Press 2004). He can be reached at 480-951-3222 or Latz@ExpertNegotiator.com

Written by Marty Latz, Latz Negotiation Institute

Much attention has been focused recently on the scandal involving the General Services Administration spending $822,751 on a lavish Las Vegas conference.  Event planners allegedly violated the GSA’s competitive bidding requirements when they purchased a variety of goods and services for the conference, including spending $75,000 on a team-building exercise involving the assembly of 24 bicycles which were then donated to charity – at a cost of $3,125 per bike. Competitive bidding is a useful tool to reduce costs and the consequences of not using it here are clear.  Also, one GSA official directed planners to “go over the top,” a goal obviously inconsistent with both GSA policies and interests.

So how can you implement a process to insure your negotiators are both implementing negotiation best practices and adhering to company policies?  Our ExpertNegotiator Planning & Management Software is specifically designed to help you do just that.  First, ExpertNegotiator is based on negotiation best practices, requiring your negotiators to consider the most important negotiation factors such as interests, leverage and standards.  Second, because the software provides an easily accessible record of the process, managers can efficiently verify their negotiators stay true to company policies and interests.

______________________________________________________________________

Marty Latz is the founder of Latz Negotiation Institute, a national negotiation training and consulting company, and ExpertNegotiator, a Web-based software company that helps managers and negotiators more effectively negotiate and implement best practices based on the experts’ proven research.  He is also the author of Gain the Edge! Negotiating to Get What You Want (St. Martin’s Press 2004). He can be reached at 480-951-3222 or Latz@ExpertNegotiator.com

ICLEF • Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, Indianapolis, IN

Case: D.C. v. J.A.C.
by Mike Kohlhaas, Bingham Greenebaum Doll  

HELD:
Trial court’s order denying Mother’s request to relocate with a child from Indianapolis to Tennessee was reversed as clearly erroneous.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
Mother and Father married in 1997, had Child in 2003, and divorced in 2008. By agreement, legal custody of Child was shared, with Mother having primary physical custody of Child subject to Father’s parenting time of three overnights per week plus alternating weekends.

In 2010, Mother filed a notice of intent to relocate to Nashville, Tennessee, citing a change in employment. Father filed an objection and request for change of custody. At a hearing, it was shown that Mother had an opportunity to increase her salary by over $30,000 in a position not available to her in the Indianapolis market. The trial court also heard evidence of Father’s substantial involvement in Child’s life (cub scouts, sports, schoolwork) and that Child’s grandparents were also in Indiana.

The trial court ultimately denied Mother’s requested relocation with Child, finding that, despite her notice of intent, the primary reason for the relocation was a relationship with a man in Tennessee. Mother appealed.

The Court of Appeals reviewed the burden-shifting nature of the relocation statute and prior case law applying it. The Court concluded the substantial increase in Mother’s income would “provide additional opportunities for Mother and [Child].”  The Court acknowledged that Child’s relocation would impair Father’s frequent contact with Child, but that, if this consideration were deemed dispositive, relocation would be permitted almost never. Finally, the Court underscored that Mother had been Child’s primary caregiver, thus, the upheaval of relocating Child would be less than the upheaval of losing Child’s primary caregiver.

Thus, the Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court’s denial of Mother’s relocation was clearly erroneous, and that order was reversed and remanded.

To view the text of this opinion in its entirety, click here: D.C. v. J.A.C.

ICLEF • Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, Indianapolis, IN