Reference no: EM131296023

Please read the following case study based on the real life case between Apple and Samsung and answer the questions based on the reading for this module (Chapter 5, 8 and 9 in the 6th edition and Chapters 7, 8, and 9 in the 5th edition) as well as your knowledge of negotiation up to this point in the course. Your answers should follow the rubric which I previously made available to you. You should use the rubric as a guide to writing a complete answer. In addition, the rubric will give you an idea of how I will grade your answer. In April 2011, Apple filed a lawsuit accusing Samsung of copying the iPhone when the Korean company created its Galaxy line of phones.
Samsung countersued Apple for not paying royalties for using its wireless transmission technology. Since then, there have been multiple lawsuits in several countries regarding the patents of these products. The two companies have repeatedly accused each other of copying the appearance and functions of their smartphones and tablet devices.

Both companies have shown a willingness to compromise in an effort to avoid going to court. They cut the number of disputed patents in half and agreed to go to mediation to settle the case. However, Apple filed a motion asking the presiding judge to bar the sale of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 on the grounds that the tablet unfairly copied Apple's second-generation tablet.
Both sides have publicly stated that they wish to avoid a lengthy and costly legal battle. Samsung is one of Apple's biggest suppliers, and both companies would like to resolve their dispute and strengthen their long and profitable partnership. Apple stands to lose millions in legal fees as well as lost profits, and the same can be said of Samsung.

1. The above dispute involves two large profitable corporations who have had a long standing relationship. Of course, both companies produce more than just cell phones and tablets but this technology is an important part of their portfolio. Assess the dispute based on the concepts found in Chapter 8-Finding and Using Power. Your answer should begin with which one of the two corporations you believe has the most power and what tactics the weaker corporation could utilize to counteract this power (review Chapter 8 subsection regarding "Dealing with Others Who Have More Power'). In other words what tactics could the weaker corporation employ to strengthen their position.

2. Next, analyze the sources of power found in chapter 9-informational, personality, position, relationship based, and contextual. Which of these sources of power do you theorize were in play in the Apple dispute? How could each corporation use its source of power to strengthen its position in the negotiation? Please be detailed in your answer based on the terminology and concepts from the chapter. Though you do not know all the facts in the case, you can base your answer on your knowledge of cell phones and tablets and the knowledge that the corporations need each other to produce these products for consumer use.

3. We can assume that both companies believe that the other has been guilty of unethical behavior. Imagine being present at the mediation and Samsung begins to use deceptive tactics in order to gain an advantage in the negotiation. List some of the potential deceptive tactics that Samsung could use to get an advantage and how they would be advantageous and/or disadvantageous to Samsung. What would be the motivation to use these tactics and what might the consequences be? How could Apple counteract Samsung's deception? You should use the concepts and terms found in Chapter 5 in your answer.
4. As the case study suggests, the two companies have an interest in resolving the dispute and maintaining their relationship. The cell phone and tablet business is a multi-million dollar business which seems to be increasing its market every year. Based on Chapter 9, Relationships in Negotiation, analyze how trust would play a role in the negotiation. In addition, how could the companies repair the broken trust that we can assume exists between them now in order to continue their business relationship.