Abstract
In this paper we analyze how the way in which the principal’s preferences are visualized may affect the accuracy of representation of this principal by their agent. We study the processes of multi-issue electronic representative negotiations conducted by agents on behalf of their principals by means of the negotiation support system that implements a simple decision support tool for eliciting the preferences and building a system of cardinal ratings for feasible negotiation offers. First, we investigate the accuracy of agents’ scoring systems and compare their concordance to the preferential information provided to them by their principals by means of single verbal description and two different visualization techniques, one using bar graphs and the second—circles (pies). The concordance is measured by means of the notions of ordinal and cardinal accuracy. Then we analyze how the scoring systems with various inaccuracy indexes influence the agents’ perception of negotiation process, i.e. the interpretation of concessions made by parties and the structures of concession paths. We also study what is an impact of inaccurate scoring systems on the negotiation outcomes, i.e. the final contracts, their ratings and efficiency. The results obtained show that the bars are slightly better in more precise representation of principals preferences. They allow agent to determine a little more accurate scoring systems, which help to understand the negotiation process better by minimizing the cardinal error of evaluation of the offers in concession paths. Yet, no significant impact on the outcomes have been found. An interesting prescriptive conclusion that can be drawn is that to assure an adequate representation of principal’s preferences the agents should be offered the bar-based visualization. Also, a checkup mechanism should be introduced to the preference elicitation procedure that assure the agents to be ordinally concordant with the priorities of their principal’s preferences.
Highlights
Theoretical and empirical research underlines the complex nature of negotiation (Fisher et al 2011; Lewicki et al 2011; Starkey et al 2005; Thompson 2015)
To verify the research questions two negotiation experiments were organized in Inspire negotiation system (Kersten and Noronha 1999), which is the first negotiation support systems designed for conducting bilateral multi-issue negotiations via Web
The main goal of our study was to check how different ways, in which the principals impart their preferences on their agents affect the accuracy of the scoring system the agents build, and whether such systems can provide a reliable support during the negotiation process allowing to interpret the negotiation moves and outcomes correctly
Summary
Theoretical and empirical research underlines the complex nature of negotiation (Fisher et al 2011; Lewicki et al 2011; Starkey et al 2005; Thompson 2015). Its complexity results from a number of factors that comprise the negotiation problem and context, including behavioural, demographical, sociological, economical, and political These factors need to be considered by the parties when they prepare for and conduct negotiations. The latter approach to negotiation support seems to be of crucial importance It allows for the measurement of the value (utility) of the negotiation outcomes, evaluation of the parties’ performance, and analysis of the agreement’s efficiency. This support is a domain of negotiation analysis—a theoretical approach developed in the early 1980s (Raiffa 1982; Young 1991), that focuses on designing decision-analytic techniques
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
