Movie 13 Days Case Study

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 249
  • Published : December 17, 2009
Open Document
Text Preview
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 actual meeting within the Kennedy Administration where the head of Chiefs (Taylor) wants to strike the missiles in Cuba, John F. Kennedy (JFK) walk outs with no final decision on what he would like to do. After the meeting, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were baffled that he just up and left the meeting. The military gurus were trying to get JFK to make a decision on the spot without taking much thought into the situation. JFK was finding out what everyone felt was the right thing to do in the room. He said he would want air forces prepared if this is the sort of attack they plan to do but never gave a concise final answer. Later on, someone in the room asked if this was the means he planned on using rather than political action. This was his trigger to get up and depart. He did not want to make a rational decision on something so serious. The Joint Chiefs were intimidating by stating this was the mutual decision between all of them. However, they want to use their military power in a peaceful world, where ultimately it would cause worse circumstances. Also, Dean Atchison (who is someone that supposedly understands everything about how the Soviet Union acts) was backing up the ideas of the Joint Chiefs. The Joint Chiefs assuring the invasion would succeed and it would be easy just like that by signing the dotted line. In this situation, JFK did the right thing here in which he got up and left and began to consult with Bobby and Kenny about the situation. They want to make sure there are no other alternatives that can create a peaceful outcome. The situation present here is an intragroup conflict (p. 17, Lewicki) since everyone is on the same team in this scenario. Everyone was not on the same page, but they are not fighting against each other rather they are coming up with the most viable solution. The team basically split into two groups, JFK’s (JFK, Bobby, and Kenny) and then the Joint Chief of Staff’s (plus Dean Atchison) afterwards which held their own bias perceptions on the matter stated earlier (p. 18, Lewicki). There are two important scenarios in this situation, make sure the missiles are removed/dismantled from Cuba, and to make sure nothing more occurs that can cause lives to be lost. This was an example of an integrative negotiating process due to their being no bargaining of any sort between the two groups. They were able to identify a problem (missiles in Cuba), understand the problem (enough range to hit United States), generate alternative solutions (three options about how to strike), and then they did not complete the final step. (p. 61, Lewicki) For the Joint Chiefs to try to close the deal they offered three solutions to give JFK alternatives to the one. Ultimately, all three solutions created a means of action which JFK did not want to go to if possible. (p. 46-47, Lewicki) The situation did not end with a compromise because none of the alternatives were viable choices for JFK. JFK must talk to the Publisher of Times about not publishing the story about the situation at hand until after he releases his statement to the public on Monday. The public must not know until...
tracking img