Runaway Jury (2003) Negotiation Type:

¶ … Runaway Jury (2003)

Negotiation Type: Integrative Bargaining

The movie 'Runaway Jury' chosen for this article is most apt as it covers various aspects of the negotiation process in an in-depth manner, and helps to practically explain many dimensions of negotiation analysis. The basic negotiation type identified in this movie is Integrative Bargaining, and most of the discussion in the paper will relate to the aspects referred to in the movie related to Integrative Bargaining.

In the process of integrative negotiation/bargaining, the parties assume that all the stakeholders involved have something to gain from the exchange. It is also known as win-win bargaining, where both the parties look for a situation that is most profitable for both of them. This sort of bargaining results in more satisfactory outcomes for all the parties involved, compared to the situation where the parties stick to their positions (Positional Bargaining). And unlike Positional Bargaining, both the parties can emerge victorious at the end of the exchange, as opposed to the compulsory existence of at least one loser. At the start of such a negotiation, it is best to build trust. In this form of negotiation, ideally rivalries should not be played out. Instead the parties should build trust and form a relationship. It is important for both the parties to understand each other's interests and priorities. It is often the case that the interests of the parties overlap in such a way that each gets their choice of the pie without sacrificing their interest.

It is equally important to set the scope of the negotiation to make sure the parties know what's on the table and what's not. It also helps to define the parameters under which the negotiation would take place. The end result is intended to integrate the problems of each of the parties in such a way that they work towards a positive solution. A classic example in the negotiation theory is that of two girls fighting over an orange. If distributive bargaining is to be practiced, the more of the orange that one girl gets, the other girl gets fewer and fewer. Thus, there remains a conflict of interest. But if the interests are explored in the required depth, it might be unearthed that one girl wanted the meat of the orange, while the other wanted the peels. This is the integrative bargaining approach, wherein both the parties get their interests addressed.

We now move onto the negotiation situation in the movie. The movie revolves around a case where the plaintiff, Mrs. Wood, sues the gun company Vicksburg Firearms, for irresponsibly providing a gun to a person who shot dead her husband. The plaintiff lawyer is Rohr. The defendant (Gun Company) is represented by Fitch. Fitch is a win-at-all-costs lawyer, who does not refrain from underhand practices to sway the case in his favor. In this case, Fitch attempts to influence the jury by unearthing the records of the individual jurors and their shady past and then pressing them into submission through blackmailing. He also uses his influence to get the members of his choice elected on the jury.

There are two main negotiations in the movie. The first is between Marlee (who is a member on the jury) and Fitch, and the second is between Marlee and Rohr (the plaintiff lawyer). Marlee talks to Fitch and tells him that she has the power to move the jury whichever way she wanted. She asked Fitch to make a deal with her to secure the verdict of the case. Fitch initially doesn't believe the claim of the juror and asks for proof. Marlee delivers her proof on the next court hearing by getting the whole jury to sing 'The Pledge of Allegiance', which was the 'patriotic' offering Marlee had promised. Fitch, although convinced somewhat, becomes increasingly irritated at being outsmarted by a novice.

Fitch orders one of his henchmen to ransack Marlee's apartment to unearth some evidence that he could use to his advantage in future negotiations. When Marlee learns of Fitch's aggressive action and intent of foul play, she reacts and shows her influence and power by getting a member of the jury booted. Subsequently, the two again come to the negotiating table, where Marlee asks Fitch to finalize the deal. Fitch refuses to do so over the phone. Marlee threatens to boot another member, to which Fitch laughs. He declares that it doesn't prove any power and can be done by anyone. Marlee gives a deadline to Fitch, saying that the offer should be available next time she calls. After the conversation, Fitch orders his henchmen to 'contain' Marlee. At the same time, Fitch starts blackmailing other jurors, with considerable success. Marlee meets Fitch again in a restaurant. They discuss the deal once more. She brings up the arson attack and raises the price.

While Marlee has not yet finalized the deal with Fitch, she gets in touch with the defendant lawyer, Rohr. She offers the same deal to Rohr. Rohr, being morally conscious, threatens her with a mistrial. Marlee cites the expenses in finances and time it would cost to Mrs. Wood. She then digs into the motive for Rohr, who cites his drive to 'change the law' in order to control the gun industry. Marlee simply offers two choices to Rohr: either he play by the book only to lose, or he win a great battle to control the Gun Industry. Rohr mentions his star witness, but Marlee coolly says that Fitch has control over the star witness as well. Hearing this, Rohr is discouraged and starts to fall into line with Marlee's demands. Getting hold of the gravity of the situation, Rohr asks for Marlee's price. Marlee names a figure of $10 million. Rohr is taken aback at the large figure, and hesitates. Marlee reinforces her argument by saying that unless Rohr matched Fitch's bid, the jury would not swing in his favor. Rohr's doubts about his ability to win the case by playing fair are dented further when his star witness fails to turn up at the trial. Frustrated with his situation, Rohr instructs his rival attorney from playing games and that they would land him into trouble eventually.

When Fitch and Marlee get into touch again, Fitch agrees to the deal. Fitch requests to meet other jury members, but Marlee refuses out-rightly. Fitch meets Easter to discover his true motive for backing this deal, and is not satisfied when he gets the answer 'Money'. Marlee tells his Fitch that 4 other members of the jury are also in connivance with them. Meanwhile, Fitch, clearly frustrated with the way the negotiation turns out, sends an assassin to kill Marlee. Marlee injures the attacker and escapes. She contacts Fitch and increases the price to $15 million.

Meanwhile Rohr contacts Marlee, and tells her that he has the money. but, to Marlee's surprise, he adds that he has no intention of giving it as his conscience prevented him from doing so. Learning that Rohr is out of the negotiating table, Fitch tries to bargain his way to a lower price. Marlee again refuses, and threatens that the jury can decide any second. Once the wiring of the money is confirmed, Easter starts arguing in favor of the plaintiff in the Jury Deliberation. Despite a jury member, Frank's, opposition, Easter manages to swing the jury in his favor by striking a chord with the jury. Two points reinforce his case and seal the deal. Firstly, a jury member relates a shooting incident that wrecked his life, and secondly, Frank inadvertently divulges racial and gender bias as the real motive for his argument.

By the time Fitch learns of this double crossing, it is too late. Easter shows Fitch the money transfer document and threatens to inform the IRS unless Fitch retired from law for good.

There are various points of interest in the negotiation process that is elaborated in the movie. Firstly, Marlee directly attacks Fitch's interest by offering him the outcome that mattered most to him: a guaranteed victory in the case. She also established a climate of trust by delivering on her promise of power over the jury by getting them to recite 'The Pledge of Allegiance' in the court, thus laying Fitch's doubts to rest. Fitch, on the other hand, did precious little to contribute to the negotiation, and followed an aggressive strategy by trying to coax the other party into submission. He did so on two occasions. One, when he ordered the ransacking of Marlee's house to unearth evidence that could be used against her. Second, he attempted to brutally finish off the negotiation when he actually sent an assassin to finish Marlee off, thus resorting to the basest of power tactics. Marlee shrewdly kept Fitch interested by addressing his interests and at the same time, selectively presented information to him, and at no stage did she reveal her true motive for the settlement. Fitch often resorted to extravagant claims and bluster, like 'canning' Easter in 5 hours. As the negotiations became aggressive, Marlee countered Fitch's aggressiveness by unilaterally raising the price, setting deadlines ('the deal should be finalized the next time I call'), and threatening to sway the verdict against Fitch.

Marlee also proved to be an adept negotiator when dealing with Rohr. She skillfully defined the value set by digging into Rohr's true motivation, and then appealed to his sense of greater achievement by offering him a scenario of 'Greater gun control'. She, however, underestimates Rohr's sense of righteousness, as he refuses to go through with the deal, based on his conscience. The difference between the Marlee-Fitch negotiation and the Marlee-Rohr negotiation is starkly evident, as the former is conducted in an aggressive environment with plenty of hidden motives, withholding of information, and threats, while the former, despite the initial threat of mistrial by Rohr, is conducted in a much more open and honest environment.

As the deal draws closer to its conclusion, Fitch becomes increasingly fidgety as his initial intention of having the pie and eating it too, is dashed by Marlee's skilful handling of the cards. Marlee understood Fitch far better than Fitch understood Marlee. Till the very end, Fitch was unable to figure out the true motive of Marlee and Easter. As it turned out, the strategy of Marlee and Easter was well thought out, and had planned for possible changes in the plot. On the other hand, Fitch had been caught unawares as he had been expecting a negotiation where he controlled all the variables and the jurors wilted to the pressure he exerted on them through different tactics. Marlee also adroitly remained non-committal till she was given the green signal for the transfer of the money by Fitch.

SHORTCOMINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS

The final part of this paper deals with the various shortcomings that were made by the parties in the negotiation, and avoiding which, they could have made more gains for themselves in the conversation. In most of the situations, Fitch was the guilty party. Fitch made many errors in the negotiation process. He was overconfident of his negotiation prowess and people skills. He should have been more circumspect in his dealings with Marlee once her sway over the jury had been established. Secondly, he also overestimated the ability of his database and systems, which were unable to alert him to the dangers that Marlee (Gabrielle Brandt) and Easter (Jeffrey Kerr) posed. Fitch should have pulled alternate strings to reinforce and verify the information offered to him by his personal database. The cardinal sin that Fitch made in the negotiation process was that he committed and transferred the whole amount of money before he had gotten any sort of result. This not only resulted in him being swindled of his fortune, but also provided the other party with proof (the money transfer documents) that could easily have been used against him to wreck not only his career, but also his life. Fitch should have been more circumspect with this commitment, and should have delayed the transfer of money till the verdict was delivered. Also, he allowed Marlee to successfully exploit him through her deadlines, threats and money demands. The only way he reacted to these negotiating maneuvers was to instruct henchmen and quash resistance. A problem that hindered Fitch throughout the negotiation process was that he was blinded by the lust for power and success. He wanted success at all costs, even if that meant killing, blackmailing or spying.