Negotiation beliefs: Comparing Americans and the Chinese

We address the micro foundations of international business research by examining negotiation beliefs as a parsimonious guide for international business negotiators. We conceptualise the construct of ‘negotiation beliefs’ as a negotiator’s cognition about the nature of negotiation and effective negotiation strategies. We integrate the negotiation literature and empirically investigate the differences and similarities in the negotiation beliefs of Americans and the Chinese. Across two studies, we conduct a conceptual analysis of negotiation beliefs and develop measures for the culturally similar and culturally different factors of the negotiation beliefs of Chinese and American negotiators. We find that negotiation beliefs can predict negotiation outcomes. Our findings indicate that Americans and the Chinese share negotiation beliefs about cooperation and competition. They also understand negotiation using culturally different factors, namely hierarchy and relationship for the Chinese and economic interest and confrontation for the Americans. We further discuss the theoretical and practical implications for international negotiations, particularly regarding disputes between the US and China.     

A prototype NSS based on problem structure and suggestions toward more comprehensive negogiation support

Seeking an effective approach to supporting negotiation through the use of computer technology, we have constructed a prototype negotiation support system based on the concept of problem structure. Problem structure refers to the characteristics of the feasible settlement space and efficient frontiers as defined by the joint utility distribution of negotiators' utilities. Problem structure is recognized as playing a major role in negotiation processes and outcomes. The cognitive complexity and inherent uncertainty of typical negotiations make it difficult for negotiators to effectively visualize and “navigate” the settlement space defined by the problem structure. As a result, negotiators often resort to suboptimizing heuristics which produce inefficient and/or unsatisfying outcomes. It follows that a promising approach to negotiation support is to exploit the computational speed and graphics capabilities of computer technology to make problem structure and its implications more accessible. Thus, our prototype is designed to allow negotiators to hypothesize problem structure and to explore and manipulate the resulting settlement space quickly and easily. Preliminary experimentation has demonstrated the value of this approach and has suggested areas for extended, comprehensive support. A negotiation process formalism, Cognitive Action Theory, neural network technology, and computer simulation are well-suited to providing more comprehensive support, and we suggest an architecture for delivery through NSS.     

The antecedents of renegotiations in practice—an exploratory analysis

In order to support business negotiations with electronic tools effectively, a deep understanding of real-life business negotiations is required. Comparing the settings usually applied in negotiation experiments with the every-day experiences of business negotiators, it can be stated that the work of business negotiators is much more iterative and embedded. Renegotiations appear on a regular basis. This observation stresses the importance of flawless communication in business negotiations and raises questions regarding the reasons for renegotiations and the role of information technology in this context. This paper investigates data gathered in a 2005 survey study in order to identify the context factors that drive B2B renegotiations using a preliminary regression model. The rules of interaction, task complexity, and business relationship are found to be significant predictors of the renegotiation likelihood while media richness does not impact the likelihood of renegotiations in practice.     

The Interplay of Communication and Decisions in Electronic Negotiations: Communicative Decisions or Decisive Communication?

Whilst much research has been conducted on decision support for electronic negotiations and some research has been done on communication support in this area, there is a lack of research on the interplay between these two elements of negotiations. The questions whether both are equally important, whether one effects the other, or whether they show counter-effects are important both for negotiation training (i.e. what should be the focus for becoming a good negotiator) and for system research (i.e. which system support elements need to be developed). The current paper presents results of a controlled laboratory experiment with negotiators that were provided with decision support and communication support and negotiators that had only communication support available. The impact of decision support on the communication process and on outcome dimensions as well as the impact of communication behaviour on the negotiation process and the qualitative dimensions of the outcome will be discussed.     

Data-based negotiator allocation management

Negotiation abilities are difficult to assess, and negotiation outcomes are difficult to predict. This leads to possible deficiencies in resource allocation for negotiation tasks. In this article, we discuss the merits of a data-based approach for the allocation of negotiators to negotiation tasks. We provide a framework for negotiation allocation management that includes a method for assessing negotiator strength. The negotiator strength measure compares observable negotiation outcomes relative to similar outcomes in similar situations. We provide examples for using our framework and show evidence for its appeal when using industry data. We discuss implications for managers and provide key takeaways.     

An empirical study of an interactive,session-oriented computerized Negotiation Support System (NSS)

Negotiating is one of the four major decisional roles played by managers. In fact, resolving conflict is said to occupy 20% of a manager's working hours. This growing frequency of negotiation scenarios coupled with the increasing complexity of the issues which need to be resolved in a negotiation make the possibility of computer enhancement for negotiation very appealing. Implementations of computerized Negotiation Support Systems (NSS) in the business world, international affairs, labor law, and environmental and safety disputes have demonstrated their potential for making negotiation problems more manageable and comprehensible for negotiators. Still, pioneers in NSS research have expressed their dismay at the lack of rigorous empirical research and evaluation of NSS. In particular, research is needed which will determine how and under what circumstances negotiation processes can be enhanced by NSS support.This article describes empirical research on the effects of a highly structured, interactive NSS on the outcome of face-to-face issues resolution and the attitudes of negotiators in both low- and high-conflict situations. In a laboratory experiment, bargaining dyads played the roles of manufacturers negotiating a four-issue, three-year purchase agreement for an engine subcomponent in conditions of high and low conflict of interest. The results of the study showed that NSS support did help bargainers achieve higher joint outcomes and more balanced contracts, but that the NSS support increased negotiation time. Satisfaction was greater for NSS dyads in both conflict levels, and perceived negative climate was reduced in low conflict.One primary implication of the results of this study is that NSS developers should keep in mind the importance of providing users with a system with interactive qualities which not only enhance the decision-making process but also provide them with a sense of participation in reaching the solution, as was done in this study.     

Emotions in negotiation

In this article, we discuss the ways in which emotions influence the course of negotiation. Emotions play a role in the development of relationships among negotiators; they also facilitate or hinder coordination of strategic exchanges. These functions highlight an interplay between information-processing and emotional expressions: intentions are inferred from statements made and nonverbal gestures sent. They are understood as part of an expression game that emphasizes interaction dynamics. They are also understood in terms of the organizational contexts surrounding negotiation. These are some of the themes that surface in the articles contributed to this special issue. An overview of the articles calls attention to key points but also expands on the themes suggested by the authors. The work reported in this issue provides a basis for a continuing research agenda on emotions in negotiation.     

Negotiation processes,Evolutionary Systems Design,and NEGOTIATOR

A negotiation accord is often the result of an intense, laborious, and evolutionary negotiation process. During this process, disputing parties are confronted with goal, judgment, and outcome conflict. This article demonstrates the utility of a conflict resolution framework—Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD)—by using a Negotiation Support System. ESD seeks to guide negotiators to move their individual goals and judgments in such a way as to enhance the chance of achieving a common solution. As illustrated by the use of NEGOTIATOR, a multiattribute utility negotiation support system, we argue that computer mediation can prove to be an effective means to implement the ESD framework.     

Batten down the anchors: Responding to another negotiator’s first offer

Drawing from a wealth of negotiation research, my previous installment of Negotiating Life advised negotiators to make the first offer if they can. But sometimes they can’t. Sometimes, despite a negotiator’s best efforts, the other side moves first. In this article, I provide a framework for responding to another negotiator’s first offer, suggesting that the appropriate response varies markedly depending on the quality of the offer. This provides a more comprehensive strategy for making and managing early offers in a negotiation.     

TOPSIS Based Approach to Scoring Negotiating Offers in Negotiation Support Systems

In this paper we analyze the possibility of applying the technique for order preferences by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) to building the scoring system for negotiating offers. TOPSIS is a multiple criteria decision making method that is based on measuring distances between alternatives under consideration and two bipolar reference alternatives, a positive and negative ideal. Thus the criteria used for the evaluation of alternatives should be described using strong scales. However, in the negotiation, the issues are very often described qualitatively, which results in ordinal or even nominal variables that must be taken into consideration in offers’ evaluation process. What is more, TOPSIS may be applied to solving the discrete decision problems while the negotiation space may be defined by the means of continuous variables too. In this paper we try to modify the TOPSIS algorithm to make it applicable to negotiation support and, moreover, discuss the following methodological issues: using TOPSIS for a negotiation problem with continuous negotiation space; selecting the distance measure for adequate representation of negotiator’s preferences and measuring distances for qualitative issues. Finally, we propose a simple additional mechanism that allows for building the TOPSIS-based scoring system for negotiating offers and does not involve negotiators in time consuming and tiresome preference elicitation process. This mechanism requires from negotiators to construct examples of offers that represent some categories of quality and then by using a goal programming approach it infers all the parameters required by the TOPSIS algorithm. We also show a simple prototype software tool that applies the TOPSIS modified algorithm and may be used in electronic negotiation support.     

Power imbalance and the pattern of exchange in dyadic negotiation

We investigate how a key structural aspect of negotiation—power—combines with aspiration level to affect the interaction pattern of negotiators. Conflicting research findings have revealed that in most cases negotiators with anequal balance of power reach agreements of higher joint gain than negotiators with an unequal power balance, but in some instances the opposite result has been found. We suggest that it is important to consider the interaction between the negotiators to explain these varying findings. We propose that when unequal power negotiators are able to reach agreements of high joint gain it is due to the efforts of the low power party. In addition, we argue that the low power player will be most likely to drive the search for a solution of high joint gain when he or she also has high aspirations. We tested these proposals in a market negotiation with integrative potential. To examine the pattern of negotiation, all offers and counter-offers were written. The results indicated that overall, equal power dyads achieved higher joint outcomes than unequal power dyads. Under unequal power, the hypothesis that higher joint outcomes would be obtained when the low power player had high aspirations received partial support. In addition, support was found for the hypothesis that in unequal power dyads low power players would be responsible for driving solutions of higher joint gain.     

Qualitative representations of negotiations: Tutorial on a rule-based approach

This article introduces a logic-based approach for structuring and representing negotiation problems and for supporting negotiators. It is argued that rule-based formalism allows for integrating decision-making aspects unique and specific to negotiations with general reasoning mechanisms based on rationality postulates. The discussion of the rule-based systems and its application to negotiation modeling and support is preceded by an outline of qualitative and quantitative approaches to problem representation and reasoning, and an overview of predicate calculus. The advantages and disadvantages of rule-based systems and their ability to capture complex negotiation decision processes and reasoning are also given.     

Resolving the empty core: trust as a determinant of outcomes in three-party negotiations

This research examined how trust affected resource allocation in a three-party negotiation. Negotiators were presented with an empty core problem in which their theoretical share of resources exceeded the resources available for distribution. We tested which of three components of trust—reliability, predictability and empathy—predicted negotiators’ outcomes. We distinguished between absolute and relative trust. We found that relative trust was a more consistent predictor of individual outcomes than absolute trust and that the most trusted party in a network obtained the highest individual outcomes. This finding highlights the importance of social context in shaping trust judgements. The component of trust that predicted individuals’ outcomes was affected by structural power. High and low power negotiators benefited from conveying empathy (identity-based trust), whereas moderate power negotiators benefited from conveying predictability (knowledge-based trust). Low power parties also benefited from appearing unreliable (low calculus-based trust). The research reported in this paper was supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2002 International Association of Conflict Management Conference, Park City, Utah.     

The MARS Approach in the Verbal and Holistic Evaluation of the Negotiation Template

The negotiation template, which defines a set of potential negotiation offers, is traditionally evaluated by means of the simple additive weighting method (SAW). However, some recent research reports on the potential problems and inconsistencies in using and interpreting SAW-based scores. Thus, in this paper we consider the issue of evaluating negotiation offers when the negotiator’s preferences are expressed verbally. We present a new approach called Measuring Attractiveness near Reference Situations (MARS), which combines the algorithms of two multiple criteria decision making methods: ZAPROS and MACBETH. Applying the elements of ZAPROS allows identifying a small set of reference alternatives that consists of the best resolution levels for all the negotiation issues but one. In pair-wise comparisons of these alternatives negotiators need to evaluate trade-offs only, which means deciding which concessions are better to be made. Using the elements of MACBETH allows determining the strong interval scale based on verbal judgments defined by negotiators at the beginning of the preference elicitation process. We study in detail the legitimacy of hybridizing ZAPROS and MACBETH that differ in their philosophies of decision support as well as discuss the drawbacks of these two MCDM methods and propose some alternative solutions that make this approach applicable to supporting negotiators in the evaluation of negotiation offers. Finally, we present an example in which we indicate the differences in the negotiation offers’ scoring process conducted by means of MARS and the traditional ZAPROS and MACBETH procedures.     

I Expected More from You: The Influence of Close Relationships and Perspective Taking on Negotiation Offers

Three experimental studies show that interpersonal relationships influence the expectations of negotiators at the negotiation table. That is, negotiators expect more generous negotiation offers from close others (Study 1), and when expectations are not met, negative emotions arise, resulting in negative economic and relational outcomes (Study 2). Finally, a boundary condition for the effect of interpersonal relationships on negotiation expectations is shown: perspective taking leads the parties to expect less from friends than from acquaintances (Study 3). The findings suggest that perspective taking helps negotiators reach agreement in relationships. The article concludes with implications for practice and future research directions.     

Mediation with Incomplete Information: Approaches to Suggest Potential Agreements

In bilateral Negotiation Analysis, the literature often considers the case of complete information. In this context, since the negotiators know the value functions of both parties, it is not difficult to calculate the Pareto efficient solutions for the negotiation. Thus rational negotiators can reach agreement on this frontier. However, these approaches are not applied in practice when complete information is not available. The research question of our work is “It is possible to help negotiators achieving an efficient solution in the absence of complete information regarding the different parameters of the model?”. We propose to derive incomplete information about the preferences of negotiators from the statements they make and the offers they exchange during the negotiation process. We present and discuss three approaches that use this information in order to help a mediator proposing a better solution than the compromise the negotiators have reached or are close to reach.     

Positive affect and decision frame in negotiation

This study examined decision frame (“gain” vs. “loss”) and negotiator affect (positive vs. control) in a simulated bilateral negotiation where negotiators dealt with a programmed opponent and made offers and counteroffers on three issues that differed in value. Direct comparisons between the gain and loss frame conditions, in the control-affect condition, revealed a replication of the standard frame effect: a loss frame produced fewer concessions than a gain frame. However, an interaction effect indicated that the frame effect reversed in the positive affect condition: under positive affect, a loss frame produced greater concessions than a gain frame. In addition, the data indicated a replication of earlier work showing that positive affect can lead to more integrative agreements in negotiation. The results suggest that positive affect can influence location of a reference point in evaluating prospective outcomes; one implication is that prospect theory can be useful for understanding the effects of affect in bilateral negotiation.     

Exploring usage continuance of e-negotiation systems: expectation and disconfirmation approach

Online negotiation is becoming increasingly popular and important due to the rapid growth of global e-business, with the factors determining the continuance of e-negotiation systems (ENSs) usage––rather than the mere acceptance of their use––receiving more attention. This study used the expectation-disconfirmation theory to investigate the factors influencing the intention of ENS usage continuance. Using two Web-based ENSs, data were collected from 170 negotiators who participated in an e-negotiation experiment lasting 17 days. A structural-equation modeling technique was adopted to examine the research model and hypotheses. The obtained research results provide novel insights into ENS usage continuance for ENS researchers, developers, and managers. They indicate that positive disconfirmation (i.e., where the actual experience or perceived performance is better than the expectation) plays a crucial role in shaping the intentions of users to continue using an ENS. Therefore, researchers should consider postusage factors when attempting to elucidate the decision-making processes that underlie the continued use of an ENS. Similarly, the development of a successful ENS requires its developers to consider the expectations of users when designing the system specification. To ensure ENS usage continuance, IS managers should continuously monitor the users’ expectation-disconfirmation status to ensure their satisfaction with the ENS.