A business negotiation agenda is a formal agreed upon list of goals to be achieved or items to be discussed in a particular order during a meeting or negotiation. Agendas can be formal and obvious, or informal and subtle in negotiations.
The agenda is one of the main structural elements of negotiation, in addition to such questions as site, identification of participants, and elements of timing. Together, they answer the who, what, when, and where questions. As with other aspects of negotiation, the agenda can be used either manipulatively to enhance leverage or to improve the prospects for agreement and the possibilities for mutual gain. In most cases, it will be used both ways, reflecting the nature of negotiation as a "mixed-motive" situation.
Although it can be instrumental to [research] volunteer as a sole source to write the agenda, in most cases it becomes a joint activity to construct a consensual basis for subsequent negotiation. In these situations, agenda- building becomes one of the pre-negotiation activities that set the tone for the relationship (Saunders, 1985).
In other situations, the parties may engage in actual negotiation without a formal or written agenda. When this occurs, the risks and uncertainties may be high but the party who appreciates the importance of the informal agenda has a tremendous advantage.
Whether one plans it or not, during the course of negotiation the parties will discuss a finite set of issues in some sequence and from a particular perceptual framework. Consciousness of the universality and centrality of the agenda is prerequisite to guiding negotiation to a successful conclusion.
Reference:
CIPS study guide page 146-150
Managing the negotiation agenda | SpringerLink
What is Negotiations Agenda - Negotiation Coaching (brightfocusconsult.com)

:
Giving positive group and individual feedback is easy, as is self-congratulation and, in many cases, it is hoped, this will be an accurate reflection on actual performance. When it comes to developmental or difficult feedback, it is only natural to want to move on and not reflect on the negative or developmental points, or why a negotiation did not achieve its objectives. But this is a mistake. The best learning opportunities come from reflection on what could be done better, and this can be achieved without blame, threat or condemnation.
Everyone and every team will make mistakes and/or have areas where they could have improved. Clearly, if every reflection session concludes that an individual or team keeps making the same mistake, then there is a case to change roles or consider alternative approaches.
About Dos and Don'ts of reflection, you can refer here: https://offices.depaul.edu/human-resources/employee- relations/Documents/Self%20Assesement.pdf

With non-critical commodity products, the relationship will be transactional. Buyer should not spend too much time and effort into the negotiation.
Table Description automatically generated

LO 1, AC 1.4

:
Professor Gavin Kennedy highlights that we need to distinguish negotiation from other forms of decision- making by focusing on what is unique about it (the voluntary exchange) and not shared by other techniques such as persuasion, gambling (e.g., coin tossing), command decision, instruction, litigation and coercion.

:
Expert power is based on a person's high levels of skill and knowledge, formal training, qualifications and experience in a particular procurement category would give someone expert status and mean that in negotiation their voice is listened to as a more objective, informed knowledge leader. Expert power is based on facts, knowledge, research, insight and study.
Legitimate power comes from rules, formal authority, organisation rank, staff rate or official position held.
Reward power comes from one person's ability to compensate or reward another for compliance.
Referent power stems from their personality, way of engaging with others and habit of acting in a way that is in line with a strong set of values and principles.