On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Negotiation Skills 2.0: Moving Beyond the Basics

Released on: Jan. 19, 2016
Running Time: 06:10:30
This new negotiation program is a companion to PLI’s Basic Negotiation Skills program. The program will expand on the basics to provide more in-depth analysis of intermediate negotiation issues.  The speakers are highly experienced trial practitioners and negotiations experts who will share their best tips and tactics to take your negotiations to the next level.

This program will benefit experienced practitioners looking to refresh their negotiation process, or learn new approaches to the negotiations they conduct, and will also be helpful for newer attorneys looking to expand and enhance their negotiation skills.

Please note that this program is a companion to the introductory Basic Negotiation Skills 2015 program available as an On-Demand Web Program.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:10:30]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Program Overview and Introductions* [00:07:47]
    Doug MacKay
  • Negotiating Class Action Suits [01:03:58]
    Robin G. Workman, Gayle M. Athanacio
  • Understanding the Ethics of Negotiation [00:59:10]
    Janet Martinez, Julie Matlof Kennedy
  • Considering Alternatives to Trial: Alternative Dispute Resolutions and Mediations [01:00:30]
    Shirish Gupta, Professor Rishi Batra
  • Negotiating on the Courthouse Steps [00:59:45]
    Janet L. Frankel, Madeline Howard
  • Managing Complex Negotiations: Global, Multi-Party and Multi-Issue Situations [00:58:20]
    Matthew P. Vafidis, Jamison R. Narbaitz, Jennifer T. Sanchez
  • Negotiating within Law Firms [01:01:00]
    Anthony Grumbach, Janet Stone Herman, Cheri A. Vaillancour

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Ethics Rules Excerpts, ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct (March 2015)
    Janet Martinez
  • Negotiation Tactics Questionnaire
    Jack Knebel, Janet Martinez
  • Defining and Approaching Complex Negotiation (November 2015)
    Matthew P. Vafidis
  • Mediation Statements (September 2014)
    Shirish Gupta
  • Common Negotiating Mistakes (February 2015)
    Shirish Gupta
  • Best Predictor of Settlement (July 2015)
    Shirish Gupta
  • JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules & Procedures (July 2014)
    Shirish Gupta
  • California Judicial Reference, JAMS
    Shirish Gupta
  • Real Estate Litigation Update: What You Need To Know About Judicial Reference (February 2014)
    Shirish Gupta
  • Considering Alternatives to Trial: ADR & Mediation (PowerPoint slides)
    Shirish Gupta, Rishi Batra
  • Sample Community Property Equalizer Spreadsheet
    Janet L. Frankel
  • Unlawful Detainer Stipulation Checklist (November 2015)
    Madeline Howard
  • Negotiations on the Courthouse Steps (PowerPoint slides)
    Madeline Howard, Janet L. Frankel
  • Class Action Settlement Negotiations
    Robin G. Workman, Gayle M. Athanacio
  • Class Action Settlement Negotiations (PowerPoint slides)
    Robin G. Workman, Gayle M. Athanacio
  • Competitive Negotiation and Problem Solving Preparation Outlines and Bibliography
    Anthony Grumbach
  • Negotiating within Law Firms Problem Solving vs. Compete Chart
    Anthony Grumbach

Presentation Material


  • Program Overview and Introductions PowerPoint Slides
    Doug MacKay
  • Class Action Settlement Negotiations PowerPoint Slides
    Gayle M. Athanacio, Robin G. Workman
  • Understanding the Ethics of Negotiation PowerPoint Slides
    Julie Matlof Kennedy, Janet Martinez
  • Negotiation Questionnaire Tally Sheet
    Julie Matlof Kennedy, Janet Martinez
  • Considering Alternatives to Trial: ADR & Mediation PowerPoint Slides
    Professor Rishi Batra, Shirish Gupta
  • Negotiations on the Courthouse Steps PowerPoint Slides
    Janet L. Frankel, Madeline Howard
  • Complex Negotiations PowerPoint Slides
    Jamison R. Narbaitz, Jennifer T. Sanchez, Matthew P. Vafidis
  • Negotiating within Law Firms PowerPoint Slides
    Anthony Grumbach, Janet Stone Herman, Cheri A. Vaillancour
Chairperson(s)
Doug MacKay ~ Director, Exec-Comm LLC
Speaker(s)
Gayle M. Athanacio ~ Shareholder, Rogers Joseph O'Donnell
Professor Rishi Batra ~ Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Academy for Leadership in the Legal Profession, Texas Tech University School of Law
Janet L. Frankel ~ Certified Specialist in Family Law, Law Offices of Janet L. Frankel
Anthony Grumbach ~ Director of Professional Development, Farella Braun + Martel LLP
Shirish Gupta ~ Mediator/Arbitrator, JAMS
Madeline Howard ~ Senior Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Julie Matlof Kennedy ~ Lecturer in Law, Stanford Law School
Janet Martinez ~ Director and Senior Lecturer, Gould Negotiation & Mediation Program, Stanford Law School
Jamison R. Narbaitz ~ Senior Counsel, Clyde & Co. US LLP
Jennifer T. Sanchez ~ Partner, Gibson Robb & Lindh LLP
Janet Stone Herman ~ Director of Attorney Development, Morrison & Foerster LLP
Matthew P. Vafidis ~ Partner, Holland & Knight LLP
Cheri A. Vaillancour ~ Chief Professional Development Officer, Fenwick & West LLP
Robin G. Workman ~ Principal Owner, Workman Law Firm, PC
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Basic Negotiation Skills 2018 (San Francisco, CA) Jan. 10, 2018

On-Demand  On-Demand Programs

Basic Negotiation Skills 2017 Jan. 25, 2017

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Basic Negotiation Skills 2018  
Basic Negotiation Skills 2017 Doug MacKay, Exec-Comm LLC
 
Share
Email
"The panelists provided a good balance of best practice advice and specific examples from their practice experience."
Basic Negotiation Skills 2015 Attendee


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.