Flaws or Strengths of the Lecture

On the whole the flow of the lecture was smooth and easy to understand. One of the main
ingredients that added to its success was that the lecturer didn’t saturate or overburden us by
throwing a huge heap of information at us but rather controlled the amount of information that he
shared with us as well as the pace of the session.

The lecturer also made efforts to lighten the mood when he thought that we were getting
overwhelmed by the topic at hand, by cracking a few small jokes here and there. Thus, helping
us regain our concentration and focus.

He was also able to enliven the facts and ideas from the presentation by giving us a plethora of
real life examples and even probing us to come up with examples of our own. This was
supplemented by the fact that he was able to clarify our doubts no matter how silly or immaterial
they were and repeatedly told us that no question is stupid and that it’s the part of the learning
process.

Another strong point of this lecture was the technique of quizzing the students about a certain
topic right after explaining it, which was very helpful as it assisted in immediate recall of
information. It was more like a mini-lecture – crisp and to the point; with purposeful active
learning breakouts to improve student learning and highlighting and stressing on the essential
aspects of said topic. He broke down this intensely complex and technical topic into lay-man
terms capable of our understanding, thus avoiding the use of too many jargons. Engaged with
students to make the entire experience more student-centric and intellectually engaging.

As such I can’t put a finger on any flaws of the lecture as it was one that followed the entire
check-list of what a successful lecture should be like.

Critical Appraisal of Lecture

In the ambit of critical appraisal I would first like to focus on the relevance of the lecture. Now
relevance has two aspects- utility value and relatedness. Utility value is purely academic and
emphasizes the importance that content has for the students’ future goals — both short-term and
long-term goals. For example, physics tends to be less than fascinating to your average student,
but for a student who wants to be an engineer, physics is interesting and can also hold great
utility value. Utility value provides relevance first by piquing students’ interest — telling them
the content is important to their future goals; it then continues by showing or explaining how the
content fits into their plans for the future. This helps students realize the content is not just
interesting but also worth knowing.

Relatedness on the other hand, answers the question “What’s this have to do with me?”
Relatedness is seen by many as having nonacademic and academic sides. The nonacademic side
of relatedness emphasizes the relationship the lecturer has with students. Integral to this side of
relatedness is the understanding that students need to feel close to their teachers and are more
likely to listen to, learn from and perhaps identify with the ones they like. Students come to value
what a likeable lecturer says, seeing it as something worth learning because the lecturer sees it as
something worth knowing. Helping support this relationship is the academic side of relatedness
that emphasizes helping students see how current learning relates to their own knowledge and
experience and their future learning. Relatedness provides relevance to students first via the
developing relationship between teacher and student — this piques students’ interest in what the
teacher has to say. Relevance then helps students see that the content is worth knowing by
showing how it fits into their current and future frame of reference.

Thus the lecture conducted fulfills the requisites of not only utility-value but also relatedness as
the lecturer explained to us the relevance of ‘Negotiation’ not only in the present sense as it
better helps us understand and create a basic understanding of the course but also how as future
lawyers it will be an important skill that we must all have with us.

The content of the lecture hence was very interesting as its relevance to us as students of law was
already well established. At the same time it was also understandable and having clarity to it.

Structure of the lecture had a logical flow- first giving a general outlook and then slowly closing
in on specifics. The focus of the talk did not deviate leading to discussion of unrelated topics and
wasting time allocated for the lecture. It struck all the key aspects or main points that
‘Negotiation’ as a topic entails.

The presentation was good overall – managed to capture our attention and laid emphasis on
certain keywords. The only improvement that could have been there is that a few examples could
have been added in the presentation alongside the point that it pertained to. The oratory skills
were skillful and effective – vocabulary used easy to grasp and not too many jargons, articulate
and to the point. Another asset was that audience participation and interaction was encouraged.

Introduction to the topic

The lecture started with the meaning of ‘Negotiation’ as understanding of the term creates the
foundation for the following points taken up in the lecture. ‘Negotiation’ has been defined as
“any communication process between individuals that is intended to reach a compromise or
agreement to the satisfaction of both parties. Emphasis is on that the point of negotiating is to
reach agreement rather than to achieve victory.” Mr. Nulwala threw a little light on alternative
dispute resolution mechanisms which are mainly – Negotiation, Mediation, Conciliation,
Arbitration and if none of these work then finally Litigation.

The conversation shifted from the meaning to how information is power and to be well –
informed could be your biggest asset walking into a negotiation. Information in the context of
negotiation relates to knowledge about the transaction, the need of your client and counter-party
as well, defining negotiable and non-negotiable points and preparing your BATNA to name a
few.

Next he spoke about the various influencing tools that one can use during a negotiation – having
a top-class presentation stressing on bullet points, not forgetting your courtesies to the counter-
party: smile, handshake, good morning; knowing if you are in a dominating or submissive
position, knowing the local language and having empathy.

Further moving ahead the concept of BATNA i.e. Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement
was explained. BATNA helps us know when to accept or reject a proposition. The three steps in
developing your BATNA are: listing your BATNA, being aware of the counter-party’s BATNA
and lastly creating a superficial but realistic sounding BATNA, if none exists. If we are looking
to give our office out on lease to a company and we know that their factory is located just 2 kms
from our office and that they are looking for an office close to their factory, then our BATNA is
stronger.
The next facet of negotiation was one which involved the individual or personal aspect. A few
points to be noted in this sphere were exchanging courtesies, building a rapport by finding some
common ground, body language, eating habits and no negative views to be expressed.

Then from the professional aspect we must listen carefully, have a pre-defined discussion
sequence, separate the people from the problem, know when to disclose your BATNA and not
showing any form of desperation.

Now while considering International negotiations we must be punctual, know the business
culture of the country we are dealing with, close the language barrier, bring your own expert like
language expert or an expert in the field that the negotiation is dealing with such as architectural
expert and know the law thoroughly as well as the pace expected like Germans are to the point so
fast whereas Gulf countries are slower.

Now speaking specifically about lawyers during negotiation we must be courteous, know the
expectations of your client, study the law thoroughly, remain professional and do not
compromise and be a deal-maker.

Main learnings from the lecture

My take-away from this lecture has been that for successful negotiation the first thing that you
must do is be prepared- you should know your case and the law pertaining to it, as well as the
needs of your client, which are projected through your presentation which should be precis and
clear. Knowing your position, what is relevant and more relevant as well as your local language
gives you a much needed boost. And that we must be prepared with justifications for our
suggestions and counter-questions.

Secondly, I learnt that in negotiation everything matters- even the most minute of things or
which one might perceive as inconsequential. Such as the venue, the party in the more
dominating position chooses the venue and we must never keep it at our office as we would not
be able to walk off or give it back as we have to follow the professional code of conduct. Even
something as small as the way we are seated also makes a difference. Let the senior people take a
seat first, sit close to your client which helps facilitate communication, don’t lean back but sit
maintaining proper posure. Even eating habits are to be considered like don’t eat chicken in front
of a Marwadi, know the culture and respect it.

Thirdly, whatever we do must be done keeping the interest of our client as paramount. All our
actions should be taken after taking our client into confidence and with their consent. Even when
creating a superficial BATNA, the client must be have knowledge of this and should give us a go
ahead. Parallel thinking with client to innovate the most fruitful outcome. Tell the client to leave
a clause logically even if goes against us as it is a reasonable compromise.

Fourthly, we must always be professional. Learn to separate the people from the problem and
remain courteous, establish a rapport, don’t pass personal comments and avoid ‘you’ or personal
names of third parties but use sir/madam, listen carefully and without interrupting as well as take
notes, gauge when to use simplicity, style, arrogance, do not get emotionally involved, timing is
everything. Always be punctual as it gives you time to sense the ambience and early negotiating
power increases. Do not compromise your ethics.

Lastly, I learnt that we must keep our ego aside and not act like a big-shot, and must treat
everyone with humility and empathy. At the end of the day if we have done our job well it will
speak for itself.

Conclusion