1
Module 6: Negotiation Bot Roleplay
Joshua F. Allen
College of Business, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
OBLD 310: Mediation, Negotiation, and Conflict Resolution
Carey Hansard
July 9th, 2025
2
Module 6: Negotiation Bot Roleplay
In these bot interactions, I applied key concepts such as framing and empathy tactics
from the course readings to present more manageable and constructive options to my
counterpart. This approach is evident in how I shaped the narrative and strategically guided
the negotiation in my favor. I achieved this by clearly communicating the meaning,
implications, and emotional context of my position while also demonstrating an
understanding of the other party’s perspective.
For example, in the first interaction, I effectively leveraged my achievements and
framed my contributions to the company to justify a salary increase. I outlined specific
accomplishments, such as generating additional revenue streams and being named
Employee of the Month, to highlight the unique value I bring to the organization. These
details positioned me as an asset whose skills and impact are not easily replicated in the
market. Additionally, I employed empathy tactics to better understand the neutral
counterpart’s perspective and to negotiate a mutually beneficial outcome. For instance,
while the counterpart agreed to reduce the budget allocated to my extra vacation days, I
secured a 19% salary increase, nearly reaching my goal while allowing the company to
remain within its 20% budget threshold.
In the second interaction, I placed greater emphasis on empathy, aiming to build
common ground with my counterpart. While the outcome did not fully favor my objectives,
it fostered a mutual understanding regarding the challenges posed by schedule changes and
their potential impact on team performance and morale. I acknowledged the manager’s
concerns and supported my arguments with relevant observations and data. By proposing a
trial period, I introduced a compromise that allowed both parties to test the revised schedule
without committing to a permanent change. We agreed to evaluate team performance and
3
morale over the course of one month, creating a data-driven basis for future decisions
regarding operational efficiency.
Overall, my preparation and strategy proved highly effective in the first interaction.
I presented a compelling, evidence-backed case and communicated my value to the
company with confidence and clarity. However, I recognize that the negotiation could have
been even more balanced had I incorporated additional empathy tactics to more directly
address my counterpart’s concerns. For instance, reducing the number of extra vacation
days slightly could have enabled a more significant salary increase, aligning both my goals
and the company’s budget priorities more harmoniously.
In contrast, while my preparation for the second interaction was adequate, it lacked
the depth of evidence and alternative solutions needed to fully support my position. This
shortcoming became apparent when the more adversarial manager did not find my case
convincing enough to reverse the team’s schedule change. Nevertheless, through
empathetic communication and mutual acknowledgment of concerns, we reached a
temporary agreement. This compromise, centered on evaluating the effectiveness of the
new schedule, reflected the collaborative spirit of the negotiation and demonstrated how
empathy and open dialogue can lead to progress even in less favorable circumstances.