Sure Pass Exam L4M5 PDF

The case in the question is illustrated as below:

The equilibrium price initially at P0 with quantity Q0, when supply curve shifts to the left, it will converge with demand curve at new equilibrium point with price P1 and quantity Q1. As you can see from the graph, P1 is greater than P0 and Q1 is smaller than Q0.

Direct costs are those costs of a product/service directly attributable/traceable to its production, for example, the costs of labour and materials directly used to produce the goods/services which the organisation sells.

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 theform 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

Integrative negotiationfocuses onmutual gainand long-term collaboration. It seeks tomaximize joint outcomesand encourages parties to align interests andpursue shared goals. This contrasts with distributive tactics that prioritize individual wins and short-term gains.

“Integrative negotiations aim to create outcomes where both parties benefit. Shared problem-solving, information exchange, and joint goal pursuit are central features of this approach.”

(L4M5 Commercial Negotiation, 2nd edition, Section 1.1 - Principles of Integrative Negotiation)