Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

CIPS Exam L4M5 Topic 7 Question 58 Discussion

Actual exam question for CIPS's L4M5 exam
Question #: 58
Topic #: 7
[All L4M5 Questions]

A procurement manager is preparing for a negotiation with an important supplier. He plans to withhold some crucial information so that his company gains the upper hand in the negotiation. Is this correct when considering using integrative approach to the negotiation?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

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


Contribute your Thoughts:

Luisa
28 days ago
Option C, really? Sounds like this procurement manager is channeling their inner Darth Vader. 'I find your lack of transparency... disturbing.' Sorry, but I'll take the lightsaber of option A and go for the win-win solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lizbeth
1 months ago
Holding back information to gain the upper hand? That's like trying to negotiate with a blindfold on. Option D is spot on - this will only backfire and empower the supplier. Better stick to option A, unless the negotiator has a magic crystal ball.
upvoted 0 times
Otis
2 days ago
Then it's not a good partnership to begin with.
upvoted 0 times
...
Toshia
3 days ago
But what if the supplier takes advantage of that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Filiberto
5 days ago
I agree, honesty is key in negotiations.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ashley
1 months ago
Hmm, option B suggests the supplier should just know what the buyer wants, even when the buyer is silent. Is this negotiator a mind reader or something? I think I'll go with the honest and open approach of option A.
upvoted 0 times
Leatha
7 days ago
User 1: I agree, being honest and open is important in negotiations.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Belen
1 months ago
Wow, option C? Maximizing one's own gain at the expense of the other party? That's a bold move, but not the way to build a sustainable, mutually beneficial relationship with a supplier. I'll stick with option A, thanks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Talia
1 months ago
This is clearly a case of option A. Integrative negotiation requires transparency and open communication, not withholding crucial information. Holding back details is a deceptive tactic that goes against the spirit of this approach.
upvoted 0 times
Doretha
1 days ago
Withholding information can lead to misunderstandings and conflicts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
2 days ago
It's important to build trust with the supplier for a successful negotiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cheryl
3 days ago
I agree, honesty is key in integrative negotiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maurine
6 days ago
Withholding information can lead to misunderstandings and conflicts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tracie
7 days ago
It's important to build trust with the supplier for a successful negotiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Amalia
21 days ago
I agree, honesty is key in integrative negotiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sage
2 months ago
D) No, holding back information will prompt the supplier gain higher negotiation power
upvoted 0 times
...
Velda
2 months ago
B) Yes, the supplier must know what buyer wants and how to provide that even when the buyer is silent on these matters
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacqueline
2 months ago
A) No, this approach requires honest and open discussion
upvoted 0 times
...
Letha
2 months ago
D) No, holding back information will prompt the supplier gain higher negotiation power
upvoted 0 times
...
Basilia
2 months ago
B) Yes, the supplier must know what buyer wants and how to provide that even when the buyer is silent on these matters
upvoted 0 times
...
Hannah
2 months ago
A) No, this approach requires honest and open discussion
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel