CIPS L4M5 Exam Actual Questions

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 dealer style are described below:

LO 2, AC 2.4

Power, or more precisely perceptions of power, are critically important in understanding the commercial negotiation process. From a commercial negotiation point of view (under any circumstances, either integrative or distributive approach), CIPS is interested in power from both a personal and organisational perspective. When you are negotiating on behalf of your employer, you bring the power of your organisation (its brand, reputation and purchasing spend) as well your own personal power (6 sources of personal power, based on French and Raven's power base model) to the negotiation.

In both integrative and distributive approaches, personal power plays an important role. It helps both parties push through negotiating barriers and secure commitment and final agreement

LO 1, AC 1.3

'Macroeconomic factors always directly influence the negotiations': This statement is false. For any given negotiation it is not the macroeconomic factor itself that necessarily influences the negotiation but the change or rate of change that factor.

'Changes in macroeconomic factors may affect businesses and individuals differently': This statement is true. Macroeconomic factors are factors that have general effects on the economy and many businesses may be completely unaffected or affected more or less than others in the same industry by a change in a factor.

'Macroeconomic factors cannot be influenced by anyone's expectation or sentiment': This statement is false. When it comes to macroeconomic factors another key consideration is expectation regarding what might happen to these factors, or specifically the measures, metrics or percentage rates associated with these factors in the future.

'Expectations on macroeconomic prospect are always correct': This statement is false. Expectations are not always correct.

LO 2, AC 2.2

There are many factors that can influence the balance of power in a negotiation. These factors are classified into 3 levels:

- Macro level: STEEPLE framework: social, technological, economic, environment, political, legal and ethical

- Micro level: Porter's five forces:

- One-to-one buyer-supplier dynamics.

The question asks about the micro factors that increases buyer's bargaining power. Among 5 answers, only 2 are likely to increase buyer's power:

- JCB's switching costs are low: Buyer may easily switch its suppliers anytime

- These components are highly standardised: The products are not different any more, buyer may choose to buy from any supplier available.

Other answers cannot be correct because:

- Suppliers are more concentrated than buyer: Suppliers are forming oligopoly market, their bargaining power tend to be greater.

- Eruption of epidemic in supply market: this is a macro factor. Eruption of epidemic may cause factories closed and disruptions on supply chain.

- Buyers purchase in small volumes: Buyer will be seen as less potential to suppliers. Buying organisation may have difficulties to deal better price with suppliers.

LO 1, AC 1.3

Competing is assertive and uncooperative, a power-oriented mode. When competing, an individual pursues his or her own concerns at the other person's expense, using whatever power seems appropriate to win his or her position. Competing might mean standing up for your rights, defending a position you believe is correct, or simply trying to win. Competing will not allow long-term relationship to flourish.

Compromising is intermediate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. When compromising, the objective is to find an expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. Compromising falls on a middle ground between competing and accommodating, giving up more than competing but less than accommodating. Likewise, it addresses an issue more directly than avoiding but doesn't explore it in as much depth as collaborating. Compromising might mean splitting the difference, exchanging concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground position. It is a valid approach when long-term relationships are at stake and it is important to find some common ground on which to base an agreement. Both sides get something but not everything. Therefore, this is the most appropriate for this scenario.

Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative. When avoiding, an individual does not immediately pursue his or her own concerns or those of the other person. He or she does not address the conflict. Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically sidestepping an issue, postponing an issue until a better time, or simply withdrawing from a threatening situation. In the scenario, both parties want to take the opportunity, then avoiding is not an appropriate solution.

Accommodating is unassertive and cooperative---the opposite of competing. When accommodating, an individual neglects his or her own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person; there is an element of self-sacrifice in this mode. Accommodating might take the form of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another person's order when you would prefer not to, or yielding to another's point of view. In the scenario, neither party shall concede all of their requirements, it is unnecessary to adopt this approach.

LO 1, AC 1.1