Free Practice Questions for CIPS L4M5 Exam

Negotiations do not end at the meeting; they continue through reflection, documentation, and post-negotiation review. Best practice involves assessing whether objectives were met, capturing lessons learned, and ensuring written confirmation of terms. Without this, misunderstandings or missed improvements can occur. Reflection allows organisations to continuously strengthen negotiation strategies and build learning cycles.

In the planning and preparation stage of negotiation, it is essential to build a strong foundation by understanding various factors that influence the negotiation outcome. According to CIPS resources, critical aspects of preparation include:

Understanding the other party (A): This helps in anticipating their needs, objectives, and potential negotiation styles, leading to more strategic discussions.

Defining the constituents (B): This involves identifying all stakeholders or parties impacted by the negotiation, ensuring their interests are considered when planning the negotiation strategy.

Analyzing the bargaining power (F): Understanding the relative power each party brings to the negotiation helps in setting realistic goals and predicting possible negotiation dynamics.

These elements are foundational in ensuring a well-rounded approach and enabling both parties to enter negotiations with clarity and strategy, enhancing the potential for a positive outcome.

Listening involves both hearing (1) and interpreting (2) the information shared by the other party. Effective listening is an active process that goes beyond simply hearing words; it involvesinterpreting meaning, understanding the speaker’s intent, and responding accordingly. CIPS emphasizes these steps as part of effective communication in negotiations.

Giving positive group and individual feedback is easy, as is self-congratulation and, in many cases, it is hoped, this will be an accurate reflection on actual performance. When it comes to developmental or difficult feedback, it is only natural to want to move on and not reflect on the negative or developmental points, or why a negotiation did not achieve its objectives. But this is a mistake. The best learning opportunities come from reflection on what could be done better, and this can be achieved without blame, threat or condemnation. Everyone and every team will make mistakes and/or have areas where they could have improved. Clearly, if every reflection session concludes that an individual or team keeps making the same mistake, then there is a case to change roles or consider alternative approaches.

About Dos and Don'ts of reflection, you can refer here: https://offices.depaul.edu/human-resources/employee-relations/Documents/Self%20Assesement.pdf

Commercial negotiations commonly take place during Contract Management and Improvement (1) and Contract Award and Implementation (4) stages. During these stages:

Contract Management and Improvement (1): Ongoing negotiations may be required to adjust terms and conditions as part of managing the contract lifecycle.

Contract Award and Implementation (4): Initial negotiations finalize terms, setting the foundation for successful contract execution.

These stages are pivotal in ensuring both initial and ongoing alignment, as outlined in the CIPS Procurement Cycle.

Negotiating in the supplier's environment (their site) can unintentionally shift the power dynamic. The supplier may gain apsychological edgedue to the comfort and control of their surroundings. Best practice recommends holding negotiations in aneutral settingto ensure balance and reduce any influence based on physical context. While site visits are beneficial for supplier evaluation, they should beseparate from the negotiationto maintain objectivity.

The case in the question is illustrated as below:

The equilibrium price initially at P0 with quantity Q0, when supply curve shifts to the left, it will converge with demand curve at new equilibrium point with price P1 and quantity Q1. As you can see from the graph, P1 is greater than P0 and Q1 is smaller than Q0.

To improve negotiation outcomes, seeking feedback from the supplier (1) and undertaking reflective practice (4) are recommended actions. Feedback from the supplier can provide insights into areas for improvement from the counterparty's perspective, while reflective practice allows the negotiator to evaluate their own approach, outcomes, and areas for growth. This approach aligns with CIPS's emphasis on continuous improvement in negotiation skills.

A useful and simple shorthand for preferred negotiation styles is summarised by four simple descriptor: 'warm', 'tough', 'logical' and 'dealer', which can be applied to describe individuals' dominant preferred style in most circumstances.

Warm - a people person

Tough - a hard-nosed negotiator

Logic - a numbers person

Dealer - a trader who loves bargaining

Strengths, weaknesses of logical style are described below:

Table Description automatically generated

Buying organisation may increase its leverage with suppliers by concentrating spend. Supplier spend consolidation can take many forms as outlined below:

- Vendor base reduction: straightforward reduction of number of suppliers in any category

- Volume pooling: pooling cross organisational requirement until your order volume is high enough to attract new bidders/additional discounts

- Volume redistribution: making recommendations following spend analysis to move from one supplier to another

- Volume consolidation across categories: certain purchase requirements may be common across a number of categories. In the scenario, XYZ has combined different categories but closely related to office services into a larger contract so that they can increase their leverage.

- Standardisation and harmonisation of specifications: analysis of specifications and standards for a high spend purchased input, may show that there is a little difference between them and that the specification can be standardised or at least harmonised across the group or across national, regional or global operations.

- Forming purchasing consortia: buyers may decide to come together and combine their purchase volumes to attract better deals.

LO 1, AC 1.3