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? 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 side along with the study of the need of the other party and ways to satisfy those needs.
Every time that Fontaine’s and Gaudin’s met with Relient they should of tried to aim high to successfully get a good outcome Instead they let Relient corner them by reminding them about their good business relationship that they had down through the years. This is called artificial pressure. Pacific Oil always tried to compensate Relient with whatever they wanted to keep their business. Pacific Oil should have given themselves time to compromise. It seemed to me is that their only concern was the bottom line which was to get Relient to extend their contract.
Pressure should have been put on Relient to settle earlier than a year and not to keep rescheduling the meetings. Pacific Oil took a year trying to come to a conclusion. Pacific volunteered their weakness wanting to reopen a contract that was already in their favor. Relient realized this and started asking for all kinds of different thing to add to the contract such as adjusting the VCM price by two cent per pound, they did not want a minimum quantity requirement; they had to re-meter the pipe line etc. Pacific Oil did not use their concessions wisely.
They appeared overly generous to give Relient what they wanted. Too much room was left for Relient to maneuver like holding out a whole year and still did not come to a decision. Pacific did not try to sell their ideas or the company. It was taken for granite that the company was the largest own producers of Pacific Chemical. They felt like the name should of stood for something by itself. Pacific was not willing to walk away from Relient which I felt they had unreasonable request. . Identify the strengths and weaknesses of Hauptman’s and Zinnser’s negotiating strategy.
How effectively did Hauptman and Zinnser approach the negotiation? Answer: Hauptman’s and Zinnser’s had no weakness. They pretty much got what they wanted and still decided not extend the contract in the end. What action should Fontaine take at the end of the case? Answer: I do not think that Fountaine should have called Meredith for a clearance to add thee clauses. I think they should reevaluate their marketing approach. They should figure out ways to meet the objectives at Pacific Oil. Try to look at obstacle that they would likely encounter. Decide what their minimum acceptable goal to extend the contract.
They need to be prepared to set target dates for negotiating and reassessing Relients needs so that meet date can come to a positive conclusion. How did Fontaine and Gaudin “get themselves into this situation”? Answer: Fontaine and Gaudin were inadequately prepared to negotiate. Too many negotiation dates were scheduled they were schedule at an improper pace an improper pace. A year was too long. What was Pacific Oil’s problem in late 1974? What were the events that transpired, beginning in January of 1975? (It is extremely helpful to draw a “time line” and summarize the events so that you can see the progress to the current state).
