Write Up On Thirteen Days Case Study: We will watch the film “13 Days” in class. You will then write a paper consisting of five to seven descriptive and concise paragraphs in bulleted form discussing how the negotiation issues are presented/used in the film and its connection to the readings. You should analyze each scenario and offer a series of observations related to the negotiation. When citing, be sure to include the author and page number(s). Think in terms of both integrative or distributive negotiation practices. Some things you to consider: How are problems handled? What impact do certain approaches/styles have? You may think in terms of the negotiations with the Russians or within the Kennedy administration. In the first …show more content…

The agreement would be for the Russians to dismantle the missiles in Russia, and have them sent back to the Soviet Union under UN inspection to make sure there are none left behind. In return the United States would agree not to invade Cuba. In addition, there would need to be a response from Khrushchev within 48 hours. The agreement was confirmed that if anything were proposed during the UN meeting it would be highly favorable for acceptance coming from the highest power (the president). This situation would be considered “end-result ethics” due to the fact it would create peaceful solution which would entail happiness. (p. 170, Lewicki) Both sides have a “legitimate power” in which the final decision falls upon. (p. 152, Lewicki) For the United States, the legitimate power was JFK, and for the Soviet Union the legitimate power was Khrushchev. Each party went through a trusted individual. Trust is critical in any negotiation, in particular one that does not involve the legitimate powers face to face. Kenny had to make sure that Fullman was truly trusted by Khrushchev, so he went to the FBI for his files and found they were old war buddies (even if it was just instincts). However, when the two that met up together spoke they seemed to have a trust in between themselves as well. There is a serious matter at hand, so no phony discussions can take place.