Baylor University | A Nationally Ranked Christian ...
Rules and Standards for Judging 2020RULE 1. ELIGIBILITY Participant Eligibility Participation is limited to undergraduate students currently enrolled full-time at a participating college or university on the date of the competition. Additional Teams and AlternatesColleges/universities are allowed to register 1 team of 2 eligible students. Teams may also bring up to one alternate student. Team members may not be substituted once the first round of the competition begins. If necessary, a team may continue to compete with only one student.Registration ProcessTo enter the competition, either the student team or their faculty advisor/coach may submit a registration form through the competition’s website before the announced deadline. Teams are encouraged to find a faculty advisor/coach to assist them in preparations and travel with them to the competition (see Rule 8 about coaching guidelines). Payment must be received by the entry deadline or the team’s registration may be cancelled. A late registration fee of $50 may be imposed. RULE 2. TEAM IDENTIFICATION AND PAIRINGS A. Team Identification Each team will receive a random letter (i.e., “A”, “B”, “C”) from the competition administrator. This method will be the sole method of identifying the team to all competition judges during the competition. Teams are prohibited from wearing one or more of their school colors during the competition or otherwise revealing their school identity to judges until after the final round of the competition is completed. B. Team Pairings Teams will receive their room assignments immediately before the first round of the competition begins. Teams will not be informed of their opponent teams before this time, and teams are not allowed to prepare with or discuss the case with other teams before the round begins. RULE 3. COMPETITION CASE A. Timing for Releasing Rounds 1 and 2 Cases to Teams Approximately 2 weeks before the competition, each team will receive their role sheets for two negotiation cases. These cases are for Rounds 1 and 2; all teams will compete in both these rounds. All case information and role sheets must be kept strictly confidential from anyone else, including other students and other competing teams.Judges will have access to all case materials provided to competitors. Judges will also receive a Judges’ summary with a brief overview of the case. No one having access to confidential information for both sides may act as a competitor, or share such information with competitors. B. Distributing Final Round Case The two teams to receive the highest cumulative scores from both Rounds 1 and 2 combined will advance to the final round. The final round role sheets will be distributed immediately after the finalist teams are announced. Finalist teams will have a limited amount of time to prepare for the final round immediately before that final round begins. Final round role sheets must be kept strictly confidential. Finalist teams will NOT have access to a printer to print any additional materials during their preparation. C. Facts for the Case and Permissible Team Supplies During Preparation Preparation should be limited to the role sheets provided by the competition administrators as well as any preparation sheets or notes pages the team wishes to use. Teams may use a computer for typing notes or developing a spreadsheet to calculate agreement terms or some other reasonable use that is allowed (see next paragraph). There is no research allowed, including any internet research or personal interviews, beyond the facts given in the case. The persons and events depicted in the cases are purely fictional and are prepared solely for the educational exercise being conducted in the competition. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or deceased, is unintentional and purely coincidental. CONCRETE FACTS AND STATISTICS FROM OTHER SOURCES ARE NOT ALLOWED. Judges who perceive that a team has conducted additional online research to add facts to the case may mark that team as committing an ethical violation, which could be grounds for disqualifying a team from the competition. D. Case Confidentiality Case materials, including role sheets and preparation sheets, are to be kept strictly confidential. Teams may not share their case materials or notes, in writing or orally or by electronic communication, with any other student or person affiliated with or not affiliated with the competition. If 2 role sheets are given for a case (such as a role sheet for each individual member of the team), then role sheets should be kept confidential from the other team member although team members can prepare together and share information from their role sheet orally with their team member. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in immediate disqualification from the competition and notice to your school administration.The copyright to the competition cases are held by the entities named on the case materials and is copyright protected under U.S. copyright laws. Audio, visual, or written versions may NOT be posted online or distributed in any manner or format without express written permission from the copyright holders. E. Questions about CasesTeams will follow procedures for submitting inquiries relating to the cases, to be explained in detail in the materials accompanying the cases. The general procedure is to email all questions to a central email address by a specified deadline (providing the school name, case name, role name, and page number requiring clarification). The competition administrators will draft a response to all questions and distribute these common responses to all competing teams in advance of the competition. Some responses will be distributed to only teams playing that particular role in the case, if the response is role-specific. No questions about the case materials will be answered on the day of the competition. RULE 4. COMPETITION FORMAT A. General Competition Format The competition will consist of three rounds, Round 1, Round 2, and a final round. Rounds 1 and 2 will consist of 35 minutes of active competition, followed by 20 minutes for judges to rank the teams and give feedback. 35-minute negotiation session (which may include one 5-minute break per team) 10-minute period for judges to score while teams leave the room15-minute period where judges give feedback to both teams simultaneously The final round will proceed as described above except that the teams will have 45 minutes to negotiate. B. Breaks During Rounds Each team may call for one break of no more than 5 minutes. During the breaks, the timer will continue to run, such that break time is included within the negotiation period time limits. Both teams must leave the room during the break. Teams may not speak to the opposing team during the break. Each team is allowed to take a break shorter than 5 minutes if both teams agree to return to negotiating. Breaks are voluntary and a team can choose to skip their break. C. Permissible Team Supplies During Rounds Competitors may use: white boards and markers (provided by Baylor University)role sheets any handwritten or typed notes for their own reference computers, laptops, tablets with wireless mode switched to “off”calculators and stopwatches No mobile phones may be used except for timekeeping purposes. Any electronic device used for timekeeping must be kept in “airplane mode.” No prepared materials may be presented or handed out to judges, except as specifically authorized by the case. D. Time-keeping Responsibility rests with the student competitors for adherence to allotted time periods for negotiating sessions and breaks. However, a student timekeeper (or in the case of no student timekeeper available, one of the judges on each panel will be selected) will keep track of the time. Under no circumstance will a negotiation session last longer than the time limit for the round, excluding the judges’ scoring and feedback. The timekeeper shall stop the negotiation at 35 minutes (or 45 minutes for the final round) regardless of where students are in the negotiation process. Decisions by the timekeeper and judges as to elapsed time and as to when the negotiation should end are final and non-reviewable. RULE 5. SCORING AND JUDGING STANDARDS General Scoring and AdvancingEach panel of judges will observe two teams negotiate with each other in each round. Judges will complete a Scoring Sheet for each team (see appendix), and Scoring Sheets will be collected and a separate person (student volunteer not participating in competition or competition administrator) will add the scores on each Scoring Sheet. Scores for all criteria will be summed together into one overall total score for each team for each round. The two teams to receive the highest cumulative scores from both Rounds 1 and 2 combined will advance to the final round. These finalist teams will be announced as soon as scores are tabulated following Round 2, with enough time for finalist teams to prepare a new case for the final round. Judges will complete all scoring individually without consulting with the other judges, with the exception of the final criteria IX where the judges will confer as a group to decide the best team in the room and the best individual negotiator in the room. Best individual negotiators in Round 2 only will receive an award at the end of the competition. B. Scoring for Single-person Teams for Teamwork Rating In the event of a single-person team, the judge will leave the teamwork criteria blank. The scorer will average criteria I, II, III, IV, V, and VII, and enter that result (to the nearest whole number) as the teamwork rating on the Scoring Sheet. C. Tie-breaking procedures To break any ties, the competition administrator will first use the judges overall evaluation of the best team in the room for both Rounds 1 and 2 (criteria IX). If this evaluation still results in a tie, the competition administrator will use ratings on the following individual criteria, in this order, summed across Rounds 1 and 2 to break the tie: Criteria VII, VI, IV, III, II, I. D. Timing of Score Sheets and Comment Sheets Pick Up Judges’ Scoring Sheets are collected BEFORE judges provide oral comments to the two teams. The judges may retain the judges’ Comment Sheets for use delivering judges’ feedback. E. Disposition of Judges’ Scoring and Comment Sheets The competition administrator will distribute copies of the judges’ Scoring Sheets to the competitors at the conclusion of the competition.F. Ethical ViolationsThe Scoring Sheet includes space for judges to describe any ethical violations that may have occurred. Ethical violations can include misrepresenting facts, inventing self-serving facts, adding facts through online research or any evidence of breaking the rules of this competition. If the ethical violation is significant such as a violation of the rules of this competition, the competition administrator can decide to disqualify a team from the competition. Only the competition administrator, in consultation with the judges, can make the decision to disqualify a team, the judges will not make this decision. RULE 6. COMPETITION JUDGES Selection of JudgesJudges will consist of business professionals selected for their experience and expertise in negotiating and/or conflict resolution in business settings. To the extent possible, the competition administrators are responsible for selecting judges who are experienced and knowledgeable in negotiation skills. All judges will attend a judges’ training session. B. Number of Judges Each round (consisting of one negotiation session among a total of two teams) should be observed and evaluated by a panel of no fewer than two judges. C. Role of Judges The judges will evaluate the competitors’ performance according to the standards and criteria provided (see appendix). Judges will not interact with the teams during the negotiations. Judges are to provide constructive oral comments after Scoring Sheets have been collected to help students learn from the experience. RULE 8. PROHIBITED COMMUNICATION AND ATTENDANCE A. Communication Permissible Assistance prior to CompetitionTeams are allowed to receive advice and suggestions from their faculty advisor/coach on the cases for Round 1 and 2 prior to a round commencing. 2. Prohibited Communication during a Round Communications with competitors. During the period from commencement of the negotiation round through the completion of the judges’ feedback to the competitors in that round, no one, including faculty and other persons associated with a competitor, may give advice or instructions to, or attempt to communicate in any other way, including using any form of technology, with any of the competitors. Faculty coaches and alternate students are allowed to watch their team compete in a round, but any faculty coaches or alternate students watching the round are prohibited from communicating with the teams. Communications with judges. Competitors and other persons identified with a team may not speak to a judge during the period from commencement of the negotiation round through the collection of the judges’ Scoring Sheets. Communications in the case of multiple teams from the same school. If a school has more than one team participating, team coaches or other persons associated with a team may not communicate with either of its teams during the period from commencement of the first school’s teams participating to the end of the last school’s team finishing the judges’ feedback to the competitors. If it becomes necessary for a school’s teams to represent opposite roles in a case, the faculty coach or other individuals associated with the school are prohibited from reading or otherwise becoming privy to both sides of the confidential facts or they should withdraw themselves from coaching or advising one or both teams. 3. Consequences of Engaging in Prohibited Communication The mere act of communication or receipt of information proscribed by this rule will constitute a violation, regardless of the substance thereof and regardless of whether initiated by a competitor or by any other person affiliated with a competitor. Violation of this rule may result in disqualification. Harmless error will not be a defense to a complaint based on violation of this rule because of the appearance of impropriety occasioned even by casual exchanges unrelated to the substance of the negotiation. B. Attending Final RoundTeams that have been eliminated are encouraged to attend the final round as observers. Communication between the eliminated team and any participating team is strictly prohibited until the conclusion of the final round, which includes the judges’ feedback to the competitors. RULE 9. VIDEORECORDING Rounds of the competition may be video recorded. A student’s decision to enter and participate in the competition constitutes consent to video recording. As a condition of publication and for no monetary compensation, this consent grants the competition administrators the nonexclusive worldwide rights to reproduce, distribute, and sell any visual material in connection with the student’s participation, in whole or in part, in any media, as part of a course book or any other publication published under the auspices of the competition administrator and to license these rights to others. Consent also grants the competition administrator the right to use student’s name, voice, and image in connection with the published competition materials. No video or audio recording by teams, coaches or observers is permitted. RULE 10. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT Everyone who participates or observes is expected to uphold the highest level of professionalism during the competition and at all competition-related events. The competition administrator may consider and sanction any violations of professional conduct during the competition or any competition-related activity. Possible sanctions for violations range from reprimands to loss of awards or recognition as winners. RULE 11. INFORMATION Questions concerning schedules or rules should be directed to the competition administrator Dr. Emily Hunter, Associate Professor of Management at Baylor University – Emily_m_hunter@baylor.edu 254-710-1844. AppendixNATIONAL UNDERGRADUATE NEGOTIATION COMPETITION 2020 STANDARDS FOR JUDGINGHow does the scoring system work? Judges will complete a Scoring Sheet, on which you will rate each team on specific aspects of the negotiation on a 1-7 scale. The Scoring Sheet will be used to select finalist teams and to provide feedback to competitors. Please complete all criteria on the scoring sheet and do not leave a criteria rating blank.We are interested in your independent judgment. Therefore, judges should not discuss their ratings with each other until the Scoring Sheets have been completed and collected, with the exception of the final criteria where the judging team will confer together to decide on 1 best team in the room and 1 best individual negotiator in the room. What do the numbers on the Scoring Sheet scales indicate? On the Scoring Sheet scales, the number 1 is at the low or poor performance end of the scale; the number 7 is at the high end of the scale. The number 4 rating, neutral, should be used if the performance was a somewhat evenhanded balance of positive and negative qualities. Indicate your rating by circling the appropriate number. Please circle a whole number and do not circle two numbers or a half rating such as 5.5. The last question will ask for your judging team’s decision of the best team in the room, this question will be used only as a tie-breaker if the numerical scores are tied between the two teams.Are the judging standards premised on the assumption that there is one correct approach? These standards are based on the premise that there is NOT one "correct" approach to effective negotiation in all circumstances. Instead, the strategies and techniques used will vary with the nature of the case, the specific mix of personalities involved, and other circumstances. Whatever approach is used, however, negotiation effectiveness can be judged at least in part by the outcome of the session, regardless of whether agreement was reached. A good negotiation outcome is one that: Is better than the best alternative to a negotiated agreement Satisfies the interests of one’s own party the other party third parties – tolerably (so they won't disrupt the agreement) Adopts a solution that is the best of all available options Is legitimate – no one feels "taken" Involves commitments that are clear, realistic, and operational Involves communication that is efficient and well understood, and Results in an enhanced working relationship or an agreement to negotiate further. How do the teams receive feedback? The Scoring Sheets provide the only written feedback the teams will receive, but they will receive oral feedback from the judges after Score Sheets have been collected. The comment sheet is provided for your own personal notes to assist you with providing oral feedback, this will not be shared with the teams. What if the teams do not reach an agreement in the allotted time? The time allowed for this competition is limited and may not be enough time for teams to reach a full agreement. If teams run out of time, they should not be penalized. Instead, you can use the latest contract or conditions they were discussing when time ran out as a basis for your scores. Alternatively, one or both teams may make the decision to walk away from the deal and not enter an agreement with the opposite team. In this case, you can use the outcome for each team (walking away and taking their next best alternative option such as a different buyer/seller) as the basis for your scores. Please do not tell either team how you rated them or who you evaluated as the overall winner of the round, they will receive a copy of your scoring sheet later. NATIONAL UNDERGRADUATE NEGOTIATION COMPETITION 2020SCORING SHEETJudge’s Name: ____________________ Room #: ______________ Team Letter: ________ Negotiation Round Judged: __________________ Total Score: _____________ (Judges please leave this blank, it will be computed later)I. NEGOTIATION PLANNING How well-prepared was this team, judging from its performance and its apparent strategy? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Unprepared Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Prepared Highly Unprepared Unprepared Prepared Prepared II. FLEXIBILITY IN DEVIATING FROM PLANS OR ADAPTING STRATEGY Was this team able to adapt its strategy to, for example, new information or to unforeseen moves by the opposing team? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Inflexible Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Flexible Highly Inflexible Inflexible Flexible Flexible III. INDIVIDUAL OUTCOME To what extent did the outcome of the session, regardless of whether agreement was reached, serve this team’s own goals? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Poorly Somewhat NeutralSomewhat Served Fully Poorly Served Poorly Served Served Served Served IV. JOINT OUTCOME To what extent did the outcome of the session, regardless of whether agreement was reached, serve both of the team’s goals? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Poorly Somewhat NeutralSomewhat Served Fully Poorly Served Poorly Served Served Served Served V. REALISM OF OUTCOME To what extent did the outcome of the session reflect a realistic/feasible outcome or agreement that could happen in the business world today? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very UnrealisticSomewhat NeutralSomewhat Realistic Very Unrealistic Unrealistic Realistic Realistic VI. TEAMWORK How effective were the negotiators in working together as a team, in sharing responsibility, in communicating with each other, and providing mutual backup? If a team consists of only one student, leave blank. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Ineffective Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Effective Highly Ineffective Ineffective Effective Effective VII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE NEGOTIATING TEAMS To what extent was the content of this team’s communication with the other team effective in terms of being clear, coherent, and articulate? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Ineffective Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Effective Highly Ineffective Ineffective Effective Effective To what extent was the emotional tone of interactions with the other team appropriate and effective? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Ineffective Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Effective Highly Ineffective Ineffective Effective Effective To what extent was this team effective at listening to and interacting dynamically with the other team through framing, probing, and questioning? 12 3 4 5 6 7 Very Ineffective Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Effective Highly Ineffective Ineffective Effective Effective Average score for Relationship between the Negotiating Teams: ________ (judges leave blank)VIII. NEGOTIATING ETHICS Did you see any ethical violation occur with this team? Ethical violations can include misrepresenting facts, inventing self-serving facts, adding facts through online research or any evidence of breaking the rules of this competition. Please describe the ethical violation if applicable: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________IX. OVERALL (Judges confer with each other for this section only)Which team was the best team in this round? Team letter: __________Which single individual in the room was the best negotiator? ____________________________JUDGE’S COMMENT SHEETJudge’s Name: ____________________ Room #: ______________ Team Letter: ________ Negotiation Round Judged: __________________ Please use the space below for comments: I. STRENGTHS: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ II. AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- chapter 01 accounting and business
- the gacp accenting professional law enforcement through
- ethical and legal issues in group psychotherapy
- organisation and contact details crown agents
- standards of conduct and procedures for handling
- bid response template instructions to bidders
- california courts
- baylor university a nationally ranked christian
- code of business conduct ethics policy
Related searches
- is duke university a 501c3
- is walden university a scam
- is aspen university a scam
- nationally ranked high school football
- baylor university spring break 2020
- baylor university football 2020
- baylor university fall 2020 calendar
- baylor university 2020 calendar
- baylor university calendar spring 2020
- baylor university commencement 2020
- baylor university academic calendar 2020
- baylor university 2021 calendar