New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

MGT 445 Week 2 Learning Team Assignment Case Study Analysis Part A GÇ£Power Play for HowardGÇ¥


MGT 445 Week 2 Learning Team Assignment Case Study Analysis Part A GÇ£Power Play for HowardGÇ¥ fin571

Marketplace > Kaplan University > fin571 > MGT 445 Week 2 Learning Team Assignment Case Study Analysis Part A G Power Play for HowardG

Almost Ready


These notes were just uploaded, and will be ready to view shortly.

Purchase these notes here, or revisit this page.

Either way, we'll remind you when they're ready :)

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

MGT 445 Week 2 Learning Team Assignment Case Study Analysis Part A GÇ£Power Play for HowardGÇ¥
Study Guide
50 ?




Popular in

Popular in Department

This 0 page Study Guide was uploaded by an elite notetaker on Tuesday November 10, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to fin571 at Kaplan University taught by in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 24 views.


Reviews for MGT 445 Week 2 Learning Team Assignment Case Study Analysis Part A GÇ£Power Play for HowardGÇ¥


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 11/10/15
Running head CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot Case Study Analysis Part A quotPower Play for Howardquot Team Members MGT445 July 24 2011 Instructor CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 2 Case Study Analysis Part A quotPower Play for Howardquot Negotiation can be complex and involve a difficult process for both parties The negotiation process involves the elements of relationship communication interests options standards alternatives and commitments Both parties must have a checklist before starting a negotiation to help to organize the ow of the negotiation process J uwan Howard is a 23year old athlete who plays basketball for Washington Bullets The negotiation between the Miami Heat and the Washington Bullets over Juwan Howard s free agent contract was intense and difficult The integrative bargaining had both parties use different approaches to the negotiation process to reach the most profitable agreement J uwan Howard s contract between the Miami Heat and the Washington Bullets shows how J uwan Howard was the first national basketball association player to sign a contract making over a 100 million dollars between intangible and tangible benefits Lewicki Saunders amp Barry 2006 Learning Team A will summarize and discuss J uwan s case by evaluating the intangible and tangible benefits and evaluate the costs and risks in association with negotiating the contract of Juwan Howard and both teams general managers Evaluation of Benefits Buying and selling of sportsmen is normal in sports in today s society Wherever involving buying and selling negotiations are a must The purpose of these dialogues is to find a way of ensuring maximum benefit for everyone However as an ideal scenario is impossible so some parties involved have to miss a few and maybe all the benefits he or she wanted from the deaL CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 3 The process of two people or groups coming to a mutual contract about different wants or thoughts is negotiation Negotiations bring two kinds of benefits tangible measurable countable like money and intangible feelings loyalty satisfaction In the case study under observation involved are more than two parties and they reaped some rewards The man at the center Juwan Howard did not only gain monetary security something he had sought from the start but also the pleasure of playing for his favorite team He wanted to stay at Washington Bullets and wanted to cash his golden playing years to the maximum When pushed into a corner he chose a tangible reward over the intangible one because common perception is money buys everything His happiness mainly stemmed from the uncountable gift He did not hesitate to rejoin the Bullets overjoyed at the first chance which shows intangible rewards hold sway over their counterpart Bullets received back their most valuable player meaning pleasure of winning and as a consequence big money The most important made them jump at the chance of receiving him back was the approval of their supporters Unseld obtained a chance of saving face by securing the opportunity to form a match winning combination another intangible reward Falk s interest was the benefit of his client and in return monetary benefits Riley the only one to lose made the Heats lose face in front of fans All these intangible benefits indirectly led to the securing of money Hence securing of tangible rewards is dependent on the gain of intangible ones The reason they are associated to items more valuable than money like love freedom happiness pleasure etc Evaluate Cost Associated with the Negotiation CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 4 J uwan Howard was a promising basketball player for the Washington Bullets who became a free agent and was in the process of negotiating his contract At the time of J uwan s free agency he was one of the top players for the Washington Bullets Juwan did not initially resigned with the Washington Bullets as he turned down their offer of 784 million over seven years J uwan Howard decided that the offer of 100 million for seven years from the Miami Heat was more lucrative and signed the contract with the Miami Heat Within thirty days the Miami Heat contract was proven invalidated and J uwan Howard wind up signing with the Washington Bullets anyway Since Juwan Howard did not accept their initial offer there could have been a sense of reputation risk as the general manager of the Washington Bullets stated that he believed J uwan Howard decision was primarily based on money Lewicki Barry amp Saunders 2007 Chapter 3 This can give a sense of a lack of loyalty from a prior business relationship that was fruitful Additionally the cost risk that can be absorbed from the Washington Bullets would be that Juwan Howard s performance may decrease and since his contract is guaranteed the franchise would still have to pay his contract On the other hand there were legal obstacles within the contract negotiations with the Miami Heat which actually went to arbitration For the owners of the Miami Heat the cost risk would be that they would still have to payout the contract the Juwan Howard and not have the player at the same time which would be like giving away money Apparently in the end Washington Bullets increased their contract for J uwan Howard to 1008 million because they wanted Juwan to stay and wanted a happy player and the Miami Heat gave up their fight in the arbitration proceeding for the act of exceeding the salary cap by 9 million which was against leagues rules at the time The Miami Heat was fined 5 millions CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 5 for Violation which was additional cost to the franchise and also included a one year suspension of the general manager Seattle Times News Services 1996 Evaluation of Risks Taking into consideration the exorbitant amounts of money in the negotiations associated with the Power Play for Howard the risks here will be based upon the competitive range of salaries awarded through the National Basketball League to its players This is mentioned due to the fact that as far as negotiations are concerned risks are generally associated with detrimental losses of tangible and intangible benefits Although Howard showed some emotional inclination his intangible benefit to remain as a player for the Washington Bullets as is his case as well as that of most bigbusiness negotiations it became a matter of how much a monetary tangible benefit as opposed to why For simplicity Lewicki Saunders and Barry 2005 describe this concept as differences in risk tolerance wherein they state People differ in the amount of risk they are comfortable assuming p 17 In the case of Howard the main risk to him was wagering his salary based upon the outcome of the arbitration taking place between the league and union concerning the legalities of a salary cap as outlined in his signed contract with Miami Basically the dispute concerned as to whether or not Howard s contract with Miami based on the definition of unlikely and likely bonuses vs the cap was in fact legal Salary caps are to be taken seriously in the industry of the NBL Kesenne 2000 relays its importance in stating This NBAstyle salary cap not only imposes a maximum amount but also a minimum amount of money that must be spent on player salaries It follows that CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 6 the small clubs need some subsidization from the big clubs so as to be able to pay the salaries p 423 This left Howard in a very vulnerable position Howard s risk specifically involved the fact that if Miami with whom he possessed the contract in dispute lost the arbitration fight with the league that as a result a limited supply of monies would be available by other NBA organizations to pay him even close to the anticipated salary of that of an athlete with his competitive value Howard concluded that if he backed Miami and the team lost a protracted fight with the league other NBA clubs might have as little as 40 million or 50 million to offer him for seven years In effect he would take a 50 million pay cut and become he said a laughingstock Lewicki Saunders and Barry 2005 p 623 In conclusion Howard decided to in compliance with union and league rules in reference to disapproved contracts that as his with Miami sign a second contract offered by the Bullets in Washington This act also in accordance with union and league regulations further determined arbitration between Miami and the league null Any risk to Howard was now eliminated He signed a contract of equal monetary amount as that offered by Miami This decision ultimately satisfying his nontangible benefit as well as this is where Howard wanted to remain in the first place playing basketball in his same numbered uniform for the Bullets Conclusion In the case of J uwan Howard the negotiation process was one that took a great deal of evaluation by all parties involved to come to a final agreement Even after both sides felt they CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 7 had come to terms on a contract the NBA found faults that sent them right back to the negotiation table In this particular situation J uwan Howard was being pulled in different directions because he wanted to remain loyal to the Washington Bullets but felt that he deserved a more lucrative contract based off his ability and talent and the Miami Heat were proving to be more willing to pay him what he felt was his market value Unfortunately league rules ended up getting in the way of the deal that would have made J uwan Howard a member of the Miami Heat and forced him to look at alternatives As it turned out the Washington Bullets increased their offer to Juwan Howard making his final decision much easier because he could play the game he loved while receiving the monetary compensation equal to that of his talent and ability Thus he signed with the Washington Bullets with a contract that satisfied both the tangible and intangible benefits he was looking for while reducing his risk The final outcome proved to be a winwin situation for all parties involved CASE STUDY ANALYSIS PART A quotPOWER PLAY FOR HOWARDquot 8 References Kesenne S 2000 The Impact of Salary Caps in Professional Team Sports Scottish Journal of Political Economy 474 422430 Retrieved from EBSCOhost Lewicki R J Barry B amp Saunders D M 2007 A Power Play for Howard In J E Biernat R Blankenship amp A J Belda Eds Negotiation pp 616626 Lewicki RJ Saunders DM Barry B 2005 Negotiations 5th ed The McGrawHill Companies NY USA Seattle Times News Services 1996 Miami Heat Might Abandon Battle For Juwan Howard Retrieved from httpcommunityseattletimesnwsourcecomarchive date19960808ampslug2343229


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

50 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Kyle Maynard Purdue

"When you're taking detailed notes and trying to help everyone else out in the class, it really helps you learn and understand the I made $280 on my first study guide!"

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.