PPD 572 Special Issues in International Public Policy & Management:Multi Stakeholder Dialogue to better “Newgotiate”

Frank V. Zerunyan, J.D. Professor of the Practice of GovernanceDirector, Executive EducationUSC Sol Price School of Public PolicyFrank.Zerunyan@usc.edu

Select Lectures and Class Exercises by:Yann Duzert, Ph.D.Director Guerreiro Ramos Joint ChairFundação Getulio Vargas and USC Sol Price School of Public Policyyannduzert@usc.edu

Office RGL 200 Office Hours: By appointment.

Course Description

This course addresses complex group decision challenges across the public sector, nonprofit organizations, and private industry to better achieve broad-based policy consensus that can lay the foundation for more effective negotiations for policymaking and implementation. The purpose of the course is to understand the theory and master the tools and techniques that facilitate a multi-stakeholder dialogue process, which we call Newgotiation. This is based on our book “Newgotiation for Public Leaders,” which is part of the reading for this course. Newgotiation structured on the collaborative governance framework is particular to public policy and public administration. Newgotiation conveys practical tools for graduate students, executives, public and private leaders, managers and professionals from all public, private and non-profit sectors to improve performance and relationships in this highly competitive and global marketplace.

Our methodological approach to negotiation emphasizes the physiological conditions in the interaction between different types of actors with varied levels of power. Newgotiation explores pedagogical instruments for public leaders, sales forces, sourcing and project management consultants, alternative dispute resolution for lawyers, labor conflicts for human resources professionals, stakeholders in environmental conflicts, and all financial settings. Throughout our Newgotiation process there are moments of reflection alternating with moments of action, allowing each participant to craft a path to a meaningful win/win. Our methodology is all about identifying potential problems, crafting solutions and structuring value creation and value distribution based on organizational or individual priorities.

The course is relevant to a wide-ranging spectrum of negotiation problems applicable in the public sphere at local, national and international levels and in all aspects of commerce as well as in the social sector arenas within which NGOs and nonprofits operate. Many other examples can be drawn from current headlines, such as balancing the myriad of interests in communities affected by the expansion of hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas, efforts to combat drug-cartel sponsored violence in Mexico, cross-border negotiations involving downstream water uses of rivers such as the Mekong that flow through multiple countries, and longstanding debates regarding international labor standards for manufacturing and other industries.

A tenet of the course is that policymakers and decision makers need: (i) fundamentals of making good decisions (ii) assessing risk (iii) conflicts of interest and ethics (iv) organizational skills to assess the types of multi-stakeholder dynamics embedded in complex policy issues, (v) problem-solving skills to analyze the determinants of seemingly intractable problems so as to devise better remedies and (vi) interpersonal communication, negotiation, and leadership skills to build consensus and change behavior to implement the solutions. The course aims to develop these skills through its analytical framework, the topics covered in lectures and readings, and through a set of

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 1

experiential activities involving simulations and role-playing in response to cases, many of which are drawn from real-world examples. The course discusses managing power with tools of influence and persuasion; managing meetings with risk, information and decision frameworks; dealing with governments in multiple countries; designing joint fact-finding processes for policy making; contingency planning to mitigate risks; dealing with emotions and identity and developing the mindset of the facilitator as deal maker.

The course explores various governance models in Europe, USA, China, and Brazil to provide an intellectual underpinning for shaping policies and business practices/social enterprises that reach across sectors and cultures. Stakeholder analysis is used to provide a framework for understanding the organizational dynamics of complex social problems. Getting stakeholder buy-in and reaching consensus is critical to the success of a project or new policy. We will discuss decision making, conflict resolution techniques leading into a larger dialogue of “Global Interactions and Newgotiation.” Stakeholder analysis and tools of consensus building are both an ART and a SCIENCE. We will explore both through an innovative collaborative learning process and with several case studies.

Building on our policy and administration techniques of decision making, stakeholder analysis, consensus building and conflict resolution, the course will next address and “drill down” complex negotiations challenges across the public sector, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector. We will focus on advanced tools to facilitate multiparty negotiations involving public disputes in contexts, such as town hall meetings, land use negotiations, mediating labor and environmental disputes, urban planning and public procurement negotiations.

To develop your skills as a modern negotiator, you will be introduced to Newgotiation, such as the mindset of new negotiators and the technique called “4-10-10”, which is developed through four steps, ten elements, and ten indicators of negotiation outcomes. The technique is designed to solve public disputes with a consensus building approach, mapping the different interests and finding a mutually acceptable solution. We will accomplish this learning experience through group presentations and case studies of actual public disputes and negotiations. As a Newgotiator you will learn to listen to build empathy, respect, and tolerance and deal with complexity.

Learning Objectives

The purpose of this course is to develop a conceptual and a practical approach to understanding complex multi stakeholder dialogue and problem solving through communication, leadership, and management skills. Specifically, students taking the course will achieve the following:

Increase skills in good decision-making, leadership, design, and management of global interactions.

Evaluate risk Review Conflicts of interest and ethics laws

Develop skills for stakeholder analysis, consensus building, negotiation, and leadership in intersectoral and cross cultural contexts

Gain an intellectual understanding of the dynamic and complex processes involved in shaping public policy issues and to clarify when the tools and techniques of consensus building can resolve conflicts and optimize multi-party agreements.

Improve analytical abilities in understanding the motivations and behavior of individuals, stakeholders and participants that shape the policy and/or organizational process around any policy issue.

Increase effectiveness in opening channels of dialogue and strengthen interpersonal communication skills.

Gain greater awareness of and be better able to manage the types of cross-cultural issues that arise in the context of international policy issues, build empathy and tolerance, and engage in constructive interplay across multiple parties.

Master the techniques and art of negotiation and consensus building, including how to structure and manage the negotiation process with an understanding of the dynamics of power positioning and how to engage in mutual gains negotiations with governments or others.

Improve analytical and presentation skills to have impact with your written and verbal work.

Become more resourceful and creative managers and policymakers in building consensus out of diversity and increase your capacity to work through ambiguity and complex problem solving.

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 2

Course Requirements

1. Class participation: Advanced preparation and active class participation is essential and will be part of the grade. Students will be required to complete all readings and assignments in advance to make meaningful and insightful contributions in class discussion. This will be an interactive course and your participation is vital.

2. Team or Group Presentations: Team or Group presentations of 15 minutes each will engage the rest of the class in dialogues about articles read as well as specific case studies in analyzing a conflict or a public dispute. TBA

3. Individual Paper: Each student shall complete an individual writing assignment of 13-15 pages with an accompanying presentation, analyzing a particular policy issue that involves some aspect of public dispute resolution in a country of your choosing. Analyze the issue using the tools and frameworks discussed in class, providing a problem statement, issue analysis, policy or organizational environment, stakeholder analysis and conflict map. Design a process for resolving the dispute, identify the elements and form of negotiation, and describe how you will manage multi stakeholder dialogue and improve the risk, information and decision management of the problem. Due dates: Topic Identification – Jan 31; Problem Analysis – Feb 15; Presentation– February 26; Paper Due – March 11.

4. Reflection Paper: This written assignment of 8-10 pages should contain your reflections on any insights gained from the class sessions, case studies, articles read and your overall personal development in class. You may also include any feedback you would like to give to the instructors or suggestions for class development in the future. This writing assignment is due on May 2, 2014. Plus a final assessment exam on the last day of class.

5. All students are required to have e-mail capability. Please ensure that Blackboard displays your preferred email address so that you can be contacted as needed.

Performance Evaluation

Class Participation - 15% of your total grade Team or Group Presentations and Case Studies - 25% of your total grade Individual Paper - 30% of your total grade Final Exam – 15% of your total grade Reflection Paper - 15% of your total grade

Textbooks and General Reading

Required Textbooks or e-book:

Nicolas Berggruen and Nathan Gardels: Intelligent Governance for the 21st Century: A Middle Way between West and East. Wiley, John & Son. 2013

Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton (1991). Getting to Yes, 2nd edition. At any bookstore

Duzert, Yann and Zerunyan, Frank (2015). Newgotiation for Public Leaders. The Art of Negotiating for a Better Outcome. (iTunes or Amazon)

Odugbemi, Sina and Thomas Jacobson. 2008. Governance Reform Under Real-World Conditions: Citizens, Stakeholders and Voice, The World Bank. Available online on the World Bank web site:

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTGOVACC/Resources/GovReform_ebook.pdf

Additional Reading materials are posted on Blackboard OR a link is provided in this syllabus. We may also chose to distribute case studies or readings in the classroom.

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 3

STATEMENT ON ACADEMIC CONDUCT AND SUPPORT SYSTEM 

ACADEMIC CONDUCT

Plagiarism – presenting someone else’s ideas as your own, either verbatim or recast in your own words – is a serious academic offense with serious consequences. Please familiarize yourself with the discussion of plagiarism in SCampus in Section 11, Behavior Violating University Standards https://scampus.usc.edu/1100-behavior-violating-university-standards-and-appropriate- sanctions. Other forms of academic dishonesty are equally unacceptable. See additional information in SCampus and university policies on scientific misconduct, http://policy.usc.edu/scientific-misconduct. The university does not tolerate discrimination, sexual assault, and harassment. You are encouraged to report any incidents to the Office of Equity and Diversity http://equity.usc.edu or to the Department of Public Safety http://capsnet.usc.edu/department/department-public-safety/online-forms/contact-us. This is important for the safety of the whole USCcommunity. Another member of the university community – such as a friend, classmate, advisor, or faculty member – can help initiate the report, or can initiate the report on behalf of another person. The Center for Women and Men http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/cwm/ and provides 24/7 confidential support, and the sexual assault resource center webpage http://sarc.usc.edu describes reporting options and other resources.

SUPPORT SYSTEMS

A number of USC’s schools provide support for students who need help with scholarlywriting. Check with your advisor or program staff to find out more. Students whose primary language is not English should check with the American Language Institute http://dornsife.usc.edu/ali which sponsors courses and workshops specifically for international graduate students. The Office of Disability Services and Programs http://sait.usc.edu/academicsupport/centerprograms/dsp/home_index.html provides certification for students with disabilities and helps arrange the relevant accommodations. If anofficially declared emergency makes travel to campus infeasible, USC Emergency Information http://emergency.usc.edu will provide safety and other updates, including ways in which instruction will be continued by means of blackboard, teleconferencing, and other technology.

For Further Information

Any questions about disciplinary information should be directed to the Office for Student Conduct, while inquires concerning graduate programs and procedures should be directed to the appropriate office of the Graduate School.

Office for Student Conduct (213) 740-6666

Class Schedule

All reading assignments should be completed for the day they are listed. I will also assign in class or through Blackboard readings to various groups for class presentations or case studies. I reserve the right to adjust the schedule based on our progress and as necessary for a full learning experience.

Session 1: January __ (This class only will be held on a day other than Tuesday in RGL ___) - Course Introduction. Negotiation Definitions. Introduction of the new paradigm: Newgotiation for a better outcome in deal making. Zerunyan

A student, a worker, a boss, a leader, a stakeholder in public, private or non-profit settings all need to negotiate and cope with people of different cultures, personalities, motivations and intentions. This may be unpleasant and complicated. Newgotiation offers tools to deal with complications creating new energy to transform and deliver pleasant results. It fosters trust and relationship for an organizational competitive advantage never seen before. We teach this course based on a public administration framework of collaborative governance and we borrow extensively from the literature of leadership. This is the context in which we will unveil our Newgotiation paradigm. A literature review will be discussed to set up the course and the various skills necessary to be a good Newgotiator.

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 4

Readings:

L. Steven Smutko, Natural Resources Leadership Institute, NC State University. 2005. NEGOTIATION AND COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING Wake County Stormwater Ordinance Committee Raleigh, NChttp://www.ncsu.edu/nrli/decisionmaking/projects/documents/NegotiationCollaborativeProblemSolving.pdf

Bruce Patton. Negotiation. Reproduced from the Handbook of Dispute Resolution. 2005.http://www.vantagepartners.com/uploadedFiles/Consulting/Research_And_Publications/Smart_Form_Content/Publications/Articles/Negotiation.pdf

Meridian Institute. May 26, 2013. Summary of Interviews, Examining Negotiations and Consensus-building in the UNFCCC http://cdkn.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Summary-of-Interviews-Consensus-building-in-the-UNFCCC.pdf

Session 2: January 17 - Decision Analytics, Bias and Decision Quality. Duzert

We explore the philosophy and tools of decision analysis. Learn to assist people and organizations in decision-making. We also explore how human nature distorts decision-making, including how we protect our mindsets, make inappropriate comparisons, oversimplify situations and allow personality and social effects to impact our judgment. We hope to learn best practices for making smarter, faster and more creative long-term decisions. We will discuss framing, creating alternatives, forecasting and evaluating. All these are paramount in our 4-10-10 Technique especially in the “value creation” and “value distribution” steps of our 4-step Newgotiation process.

Case study: Multimode

Readings:

Howard, R.A. and Abbas, A.E. Foundations of Decision Analysis Prentice Hall, NY. http://create.usc.edu/sites/default/files/publications//m01howa624601sec01.pdf

Abbas, Ali E. Teaching decision making with social networks OR/MS December 2013

Bazerman, Max H. Moore, Don A. Judgment in Managerial Decision Making Chapter 12 Pages 206-229

Session 3: January 24 – Strategic Decision Making – Decision Tree. Duzert with Guest Faculty

We develop skills to diagnose decision situation, design, approach and guide decision boards or decision trees. Decision tree analysis is a tool that helps in the selection of the best alternative in times of uncertainty about the outcome sought. The analysis ranks the alternatives assigning scores to each. We asked our colleague Dr. Ali Abbas who wrote literally the book on the topic to come and speak with the class. He will lead a case study called Freemark Abbey Winery.

Reading:

Case Study by William S. Krasker, entitled Freemark Abbey Winery, Harvard Business Reviewhttps://hbr.org/product/freemark-abbey-winery-abridged/606004-PDF-ENG

“Freemark Abbey must decide whether to harvest in view of the possibility of rain. Rain could damage the crop but delaying the harvest would be risky. On the other hand, rain could be beneficial and greatly increase the value of the resulting wine. This decision is further complicated by the fact that ripe Riesling grapes can be vinified in two ways, resulting in two different styles of wine. Their relative prices would depend on the uncertain preference of consumers two years later, when the wine is bottled and sold.”

Case Sally Soprano

Session 4: January 31 – Managing Risk. Duzert

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 5

In this module we learn a comprehensive value driven approach to quantify and manage downside risk and upside uncertainty in organizations and in our daily tasks. We learn how to quantify risk and uncertainty to address “value creation,” one of our 4 steps in Newgotiation.

Readings:

Case : Oil Pricing

TBA

Session 5: February 7 – The physiology, pedagogy and biology of Newgotiation. Duzert/Zerunyan

Our methodological approach to negotiation emphasizes the physiological conditions in the interaction between different types of actors with varied levels of power. Newgotiation explores pedagogical instruments for sales forces, sourcing and project management consultants, public leaders, alternative dispute resolution for lawyers, labor conflicts for human resources professionals, stakeholders in environmental conflicts, and all financial settings. Throughout our Newgotiation process there are moments of reflection alternating with moments of action, allowing each participant to craft a path to a meaningful win/win. Our methodology is all about identifying potential problems, crafting solutions and structuring value creation and value distribution based on organizational priorities.

Case Study: Termination Tempest

Readings:

Nicolas Berggruen and Nathan Gardels: Intelligent Governance for the 21st Century: A Middle Way between West and East. Willey, John & Son. 2013.

Session 6: February 14 - First look at the 4-10-10 Technique of Newgotiation. The Matrix of Complex Negotiation revealed. Duzert/Zerunyan A student, a worker, a boss, a leader, a stakeholder in public, private or non-profit settings all need to negotiate and cope with people of different cultures, personalities, motivations and intentions. This may be unpleasant and complicated. Newgotiation offers tools to deal with complications creating new energy to transform and deliver pleasant results. It fosters trust and relationship for an organizational competitive advantage never seen before.

Case Study: Dirtystuff

Session 7: February 21 - 4 Steps to 10 Elements as the common language for Newgotiation. Duzert/Zerunyan

The Matrix of Complex negotiation uses a checklist of preparation for multi stakeholder dialogue, as a tool of risk, information and decision management. Students will receive a comprehensive method called the 4-10-10 Technique of Newgotiation to prepare and engage the dialogue as an exploratory conversation and creative step being cooperative and competitive. This class, we will focus on the 4 steps of Preparation, Value Creation, Value Distribution and Implementation. We will apply the 10 elements to create a common language for Newgotiators.

Readings:

Duzert, Yann and Zerunyan, Frank (2015). Newgotiation for Public Leaders. The Art of Negotiating for a Better Outcome. Chapters 3 and 4.

R. Mnookin, Beyond Winning. Harvard University Press. Chapter 1 and 2.

L. Susskind, J. Cruickshank. Breaking Robert's Rules. Chapter 4 and 5.

Davis, Albie M. (1989) “In Theory: An Interview with Mary Parker Follett,” Negotiation Journal, July 1989, pp. 223-235.

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 6

Case : Redstone.

Session 8: February 28 - Concessions and non-negotiable issues in Public Disputes. Implementation (our last step and our 10 Indicators for implementation in our 4-10-10 technique. Duzert/Zerunyan

We study in this class Newgotiation as a Process and the importance of implementation. We examine the entire process including the indicators for success. Newgotiation in action! Identification of sustainable agreements and regulatory compliance. Context of negotiation and systemic analysis of corruption. Introduction do conflict of interest.

Case Study: Harborco.

Readings

Duzert, Yann and Zerunyan, Frank (2015). Newgotiation for Public Leaders. The Art of Negotiating for a Better Outcome. Chapters 5 and 6.

Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton (1991). Getting to Yes, 2nd edition.

Session 9: March 7 – Collaborative Governance - Framework for the Newgotiation paradigm. Various examples from Contract Cities to Public Private Partnerships. Zerunyan

We focus on governance as forms of interactions across public, nonprofit, and for-profit sectors, with analyses and applications. An important focus of the USC Sol Price School of Public Policy is recognition that the effective dialogue on various complex social problems and opportunities requires the combined strengths of the public, for profit, philanthropic, and nonprofit sectors. Of particular interest are the varied mechanisms in play across sectors and placed-based approaches, not only in the United States, but also globally. The case discussions throughout are placed based examples. This collaborative framework even in competitive environments fits our Newgotiation paradigm.

Case Study and class discussion: Eight Neighbors (See Blackboard)

Reading:

Zadek, Simon. 2008. Global Collaborative Governance: There is No Alternative, Corporate Governance 8(4): 374-388. (Blackboard)

Ansell, Chris and Alison Gash. 2008. Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18(4), 543-571. (Blackboard)

Jung, Yong-Duck, Daniel Mazmanian, and Shui-Yan Tang. 2009. Collaborative Governance in the United States and Korea: Cases in Negotiated Policymaking and Service Delivery. (Blackboard)

Frank V. Zerunyan and Peter Pirnejad “From Contract Cities to Mass Collaborative Governance.” American City and County (April 2014) (Blackboard)

Frank V. Zerunyan & Steven R. Meyers: The Use of Public Private partnerships for Special Districts and All Levels of Government. California Special District May-June 2010 (Blackboard)

Sotiris A. Pagdadis et al.: A Road Map to Success for Public Private Partnerships of Public Infrastructure Initiatives; The Journal of Private Equity (2008) (Blackboard)

SPRING BREAK NO CLASS ON MARCH 14. ENJOY!

Session 10: March 21 - Stakeholdership - Stakeholder analysis and participation. Zerunyan

We will examine the role of stakeholders in the preparation leading to any Newgotiation. Stakeholder analysis is often misunderstood and sometime neglected to the detriment of any project proponent or negotiator.

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 7

Reading:

Varvarovszky, Z. and Brugha, R. (2000). “How to do (or not to do) a stakeholder analysis.” Health Policy and Planning, 15(3), 338-345.

Case study and class discussion:

South Coast County Golf Course: Proposed Los Angeles County South Coast Golf Course at the closed Palos Verdes Landfill site in the City of Rolling Hills Estates* OR Substitute Case Study (TBA). The Land Fill memorandum will be posted on Blackboard under “Assignments.”

Session 11: march 28 - Conflicts of Interest and Ethics. Zerunyan

Risks of conflicts of interest are generally found at the organization or personal level. These risks impede our abilities to make sound or more importantly ethical decisions. Impartiality, objectivity and ethical conduct are the hallmarks of our Newgotiation paradigm. We will discuss these conflicts. We will also discuss and learn the law of ethics, which may be the minimum in some instances to our ethical conduct. Trust a core ethical value is essential in the scientific pursuit of the truth. Objectivity is fundamental to trust. Conflicts of interest harm relationships reducing trust. This class will focus heavily on discussions, based on the readings and videos presented in class, so please make a special effort to be in class.

Readings:

Conflict of interest and ethics policy of Free Law Project, a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation

http://freelawproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/005-COI_and_Ethics_policy.pdf

Michael Davis and Josephine Johnston. 2012. Conflict of Interest in Four Professions: A Comparative Analysis

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22946/

Michael E. Lackey Jr. and Joseph P. Minta. 2012. Lawyers and Social Media: The Legal Ethics of Tweeting, Facebooking and Blogginghttp://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1138&context=lawreview

Suggested Outside Resource: ABA Model of Code of Professional Responsibilityhttp://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/cpr/mrpc/mcpr.authcheckdam.pdf

Session 12: April 4 - Importance of Culture in multinational settings. Zerunyan.

Readings:

Alon, I and Brett, Jeanne M. (January 2007). Perceptions of Time and Their Impact on Negotiations in the Arabic-Speaking Islamic World. Negotiation Journal.

Graham, J. (April 1993). The Japanese Negotiation Style: Characteristics of a Distinct Approach. Negotiation Journal.

Class Presentations: WIN/WIN in action! I will assign teams and approve projects that each team may select to present in class. I will provide more instructions during the introduction of the course.

Session 13: April 11 - Multi Party and Multi Sectoral Negotiation Case Study. Zerunyan

Please Read your case study carefully and be completely prepared for class. The value of the exercise is dependent on everyone being prepared. We will practice what we learned throughout the semester. Thanks

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 8

IN CLASS GROUP EXERCISE: The St. Joseph Shopping Mall case is an exercise in multi-party negotiations. It involves a public agency, a private business and five advocacy groups, of which two represent business interests and three are “grassroots,” citizen activist organizations. In this role-play exercise you will be required to put to work everything that we discussed in class throughout the course. I will post the general framework and facts of the case to Blackboard and provide you with your respective roles in class. We will need three class sessions to complete this exercise including a debrief session at the end. You will be encouraged between class sessions to work behind the scenes with various interest groups if you so chose. This exercise is as real life as it gets. I know you will enjoy it.

1st Class session: Structuring the Process, Members of each team representing an interest meet to discuss ground rules and Negotiation of Ground Rules for the overall substantive negotiations on the merits.

Session 14: April 18 - Multi Party and Multi Sectoral Negotiation Case Study. Zerunyan

Please Read your case study carefully and be completely prepared for class. The value of the exercise is dependent on everyone being prepared. We will practice what we learned throughout the semester. Thanks

2nd Class Session: Parties sign a contract on the ground rules and proceed to substantive negotiations. Session 15: April 25. The Role of Leadership in collaboration and consensus building. What have we learned? Zerunyan.

Leaders establish principles concerning the way people (constituents, peers, colleagues, and customers alike) should be treated and the way goals should be pursed. They create standards of excellence and then set an example for others to follow. They unravel bureaucracy when it impedes action; they put up signposts when people are unsure of where to go or how to get there; and they create opportunities for the win/win.

We will review Newgotiation and wrap up the course. We developed a final exam, which reviews what you learned in this class through the semester. No additional studying necessary by then you will know all the answers. We promise!

Readings:

Coleman, James. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital,” American Journal of Sociology,” 94, 1988.

Duzert, Yann and Zerunyan, Frank (2015). Newgotiation for Public Leaders. The Art of Negotiating for a Better Outcome. Chapter 7.

THANK YOU!

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 9

Frank V. Zerunyan, J.D.

Professor of the Practice of GovernanceDirector of Executive Education

Office Phone: (213) 740-0036Mobile Phone: (310) 971-5219E-mail: frank.zerunyan@usc.edu

Frank Vram Zerunyan, J.D. is a Professor of the Practice of Governance at the Sol Price School of Public Policy and Director of Executive Education at USC Price Bedrosian Center on Governance. His key areas of expertise include Local Governments, Public Private Partnerships, Civic Leadership, Land Use, Regulation, Negotiation and Executive Education. He teaches graduate courses as well as International Laboratory. He also lectures locally and globally to build capacity and foster leadership among public executives worldwide. Frank is a two-term Mayor and still serving Councilmember in the City of Rolling Hills Estates, California.

As a gubernatorial appointee under Governor Schwarzenegger, Frank was a state regulator serving on the Medical Board of California in the Department of Consumer Affairs. In January of 2013, Frank was appointed to an ad hoc experts committee on capacity building in public administration at the United Nations Division for Public Administration and Development Management in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs. In that capacity, he lectures and conducts capacity building seminars at UN headquarters in New York as well as at UN Forums around the world.

Frank has more than 25 years of comprehensive and multi-sectorial experience as a lawyer, consultant, director, board member, professor and public servant. Frank earned his Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from Western State University College of Law and his Bachelor of Arts degree from California State University, Long Beach. He also completed his advanced legal studies in Corporate Taxation at the University of Southern California Law Center. He is a graduate of California League of Cities’ Leadership Institute.

Yann Duzert, Ph.D.

Director Guerreiro Ramos Joint Chair Fundação Getulio Vargas and USC Sol Price School of Public Policy

yannduzert@usc.edu

Yann Duzert, Ph.D. is a professor at Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He is among the top 100 speakers in Brazil to teach and coach the topic of Newgotiation. Yann the author of more that ten books obtained his Ph.D. in risk, information and decision management from Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France. He completed his postdoctoral fellowship at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)-Harvard University Public Disputes Program. Harvard Law School.

Along with his colleagues from MIT, Harvard, Stanford, University of Southern California (USC), Ecole Spéciale de Commerce et d’Industrie (ESCP Europe), Ecole Supérieure des Sciences Economiques et Commerciales (ESSEC) and Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV), Yann has been advancing the art and science of negotiation for more than two decades.

PPD 572, Spring 2017 USC Sol Price School of Public Policy Page 10