AAUW Clarkson Negotiations U' Project 20082009

1
AAUW / Clarkson Negotiations U.
Project2008-2009
Student Team Leaders Cara (09), Ashley (08),
Ben (09), Kim (08), Storey (10) Clarkson
University

• Mary Graham
• Associate Professor
• School of Business
• Clarkson University

Cathy Clark Director Student Support
Services Clarkson University
2
AAUW Student Leaders
3
Key Players

• Co-PIs and Team Leaders
• Training and contest participants
• Jennifer Howland, IBM, Director, Systems
  Development Process Transformation for the
  Innovation Technology Group covered her own
  expenses so we could increase the prize s.
  2008
• Jen deCoste, Associate VP for Institutional
  Diversity Initiatives and Paula Wilmot, Director
  of Co-Curricular Programming 2009

4
Clarkson Project

• Students developed and led training on womens
  lower likelihood of negotiation, including
  barriers to negotiating and negotiations
  techniques.
• Multi-faceted contest with real consequences
  encouraged students to practice, just do it and
  form supportive peer networks.
• Follow-up student panel reported actual examples
  of their negotiations the following year.

5
Why Negotiations?

• To address small starting pay differences between
  women and men.
• To address subtle biases.
• A remedy for power differences.
• Enhanced self-efficacy of women.
• A valuable skill in daily life and work.

6
Student Leaders

• Students read research articles and pulled
  conclusions from them.
• Students read instructional design and training
  articles and developed a 3-hour training session
  in ADK Lodge
• A lot of work and an outstanding job overall!

7
Negotiations Training

• Introduction of Negotiations U Mary / Cathy
• Icebreaker
• Salary Negotiation Presentation Ben
• How to Prepare for a Negotiation Story and Kim
• How to Negotiate Ashley
• Role Play Cara
• Negotiations Game Ashley
• Closing Mary / Cathy

8
Contest - Part 1

• Two-page reflection essay. evaluated by faculty
  PIs
• Five-minute starting salary increase request to a
  group of 10 peers (i.e., the recruiting manager
  at Google) making the case for why they deserved
  10,000 more in cash compensation. evaluated by
  peers, faculty PIs and IBM executive

9
Contest Part 1
10
Contest Part 1
11
Emily Contest Scoring in Real Time
12
Contest Part 2

• Two finalists chosen from each group 1/3 essay,
  2/3 presentation
• One to one negotiation role-play on stage in
  front of entire group with a project PI or the
  IBM executive.

13
ContestPart 2
14
Contest Part 2

• Reiterate in 1 minute the points from the
  earlier salary increase request.
• Respond to negotiators initial answer of no.
• Recognize when to stop negotiating.

15
Contest Winners Announced at Dinner
800 First Place 500 Second Place 200 Finalists
(4) 100 Honorable Mention (4)
2,500 total
16
Funding

• 2008 Training, contest and dinner funded by a
  5,000 AAUW grant and in-kind contributions of
  1,500 by Clarkson University.
• 2009 Dinner panel and discussion funded by a
  1,300 contribution by Clarkson Deans in
  celebration of Womens History Month.
• Future funding
• Corporations
• Alumni
• Student programming budget

17
Blog Entries for AAUW

• When I first heard about the contest and the
  training program I knew right away I would like
  to participate as a student leader. This would be
  a great opportunity to learn about how to
  negotiate a salary. It turned out to be more then
  that. As a student leader I worked with a close
  group of students learning about the challenges
  women face in the workplace.
• Team Leader

18
Blog Entries for AAUW

• When it was my turn to go up on stage I was
  nearly shaking because I knew that my first
  request was going to be denied and there would be
  a tough rebuttal.  Making it through that
  experience built confidence and was very
  rewarding.  I know I have the knowledge and power
  to negotiate my salary with my next employer.
• - Contest Finalist

19
Formal Evaluation

• Pre- and post- survey evaluation
• Students reported an increase in negotiations
  knowledge from 2.08 to 3.60 (5-point scale).
• Students reported an increase in negotiations
  confidence from 3.25 to 3.92 (5-point scale)
• Suggestion for improvement More time to digest
  negotiations readings and to prepare for the
  contest.

20
Replication

• Student training through the the WAGE Project
  (wish we had thought of this first!)
• Contest framework and materials are developed.
• All-in-one contest package in development.

21
Replication

• Student training through the the WAGE Project
  (wish we had thought of this first!)
• Contest framework and materials are developed.
• All-in-one contest package in development.
• Institutionalization.

22
Key Take-Aways

• Student involvement in and ownership of the
  project created future advocates.
• Money talks.
• Training and contest taken very seriously.
• Contest winners returned to share actual examples
  of their negotiations.