Context Of Negotiations Research Articles

Motivational Primes, Trust, and Negotiators’ Reaction to a Crisis

Using a simulated bilateral negotiation over several security issues, the authors explore how variations in the negotiation context influence reactions to a negotiating crisis. Negotiators were primed to focus on one of three aspects of the context: transaction costs, dependence, or shared identity. They were asked to respond to the crisis with a decision to reach an immediate agreement, continue negotiating, or reframe the issues. The results showed that mutual dependence (unattractive alternatives) led to reframing (turning points) whereas high transaction costs led to a preference for continuing the negotiation. Shared identity did not affect negotiators preference across alternative courses of action. Affective trust amplified the impact of dependence and transaction costs: the decision to reframe was made more often by negotiators who reported low affective trust, whereas the decision to reach immediate agreement was made more often by negotiators who reported high affective trust. High cognitive trust encouraged negotiators to continue the negotiation if they had a shared identity or if transaction costs were high. Applications were made to real-world cases and implications were developed for Relational Order theory and for further research.

Extremely Difficult Negotiator Goals: Do They Follow the Predictions of Goal-Setting Theory?

Traditional goal-setting theory has been applied extensively in negotiation research. We examine one of the major tenets of the theory that has yet to be tested in the negotiation context, the argu...

Organizational Negotiation Skills, Persuasion, and the Contested Meaning of ISO 26000

To date limited research has been conducted on how organizations persuade powerful institutional constituents to alter the meaning of ideologically contested practices. Drawing from a negotiated orders perspective of institutionalization and novel data from the development of ISO 26000, an international standard defining the practice of CSR, this paper argues that whether a constituent is persuaded will depend upon the bargaining skills of an organization. An organizational negotiation skills model of institutional persuasion is developed and tested with results suggesting that an organization’s likelihood of persuasion is strongly influenced by its ability to occupy leadership positions, be resilient in framing ideologically salient issues, and use framing language that theorizes the meaning of the practice within negotiation contexts. Unlike prior work on negotiations in which the ideological nature of issues served as a barrier to an organization’s ability to persuade our results suggest that those organizations that actively addressed and theorized around salient, ideological issues were highly persuasive.

The Etic and Emic Elements of Negotiator Mentality in China and the United States

We explore “negotiator mentality” as a negotiator’s overall understanding and beliefs about the nature, context, and effective approaches of negotiation in China and the United States. We propose a...

The Breaking Off of Negotiations in M&A Operations: Comparative Approach

The breaking off of negotiations does not affect only transfer of companies' ownership operations. Nevertheless, when the breaking off occurs in that particular case, it often implies dramatic consequences. The sudden withdraw from the table of negotiations of the only possible buyer - or at least the person seen as such - may cause a complete stop of the company's activity for a more or less long time. The hereafter comparative study shows that, in the negotiation context, the duties that the parties must abide by have different sources according to countries. Therefore, the breaking off can be assessed either on tortious liability ground, on breach of contract ground, or even on the basis of an autonomous legal mechanism. The question is commonly addressed under European countries' law systems. However, the question also deserves to be discussed in Common Law countries: even if the latter system refuses to draw legal consequences from a situation which is not yet contractual, the truth is that the Common Law systems are not completely indifferent to the breaking off of negotiations. When it comes to compensation, even if various legal basis are admitted, the results of damages claims remain modest. The judicial practices of the countries that admit the possibility of compensation actually reveal that the scope of such compensation is always limited. Thus, it appears that compensation for the loss of a chance to sign the contract is universally rejected, and that only damages which are certain, such as negotiation fees and harm to reputation, are taken into account. The loss of a chance to enter into a contract with a third party can occasionally be compensated.

Extremely difficult negotiator goals: Do they follow the predictions of goal-setting theory?

Traditional goal-setting theory has been applied extensively in negotiation research. We examine one of the major tenets of the theory that has yet to be tested in the negotiation context, the argument that goals that are challenging yet attainable result in optimal performance. Specifically, we test whether goals set substantially beyond challenging yet attainable result in either plateaued or decreased objective negotiation outcomes. Across two studies, our results indicate that goals that are extremely difficult, beyond the challenging yet attainable level set forth in goal-setting theory, produce greater negotiated outcomes. We propose that this effect occurs because of the counter-intuitive notion that negotiators possessing insufficient information have a key advantage over well-informed negotiators.

The mind and heart (literally) of the negotiator: Personality and contextual determinants of experiential reactions and economic outcomes in negotiation.

The authors developed and tested a model proposing that negotiator personality interacts with the negotiation situation to influence negotiation processes and outcomes. In 2 studies, the authors found that negotiators high in agreeableness were best suited to integrative negotiations and that negotiators low in agreeableness were best suited to distributive negotiations. Consistent with this person-situation fit argument, in Study 1 the authors found that negotiators whose dispositions were a good fit to their negotiation context had higher levels of physiological (cardiac) arousal at the end of the negotiation compared with negotiators who were "misplaced" in situations inconsistent with their level of agreeableness, and this arousal was in turn related to increased economic outcomes. Study 2 replicated and extended the findings of Study 1, finding that person-situation fit was related to physiological (heart rate), psychological (positive affect), and behavioral activation (persistence) demonstrated during the negotiation, and these measures in turn were related to the economic outcomes achieved by participants.

The Reputational Advantages of Demonstrating Trustworthiness: Using the Reputation Index with Law Students

Lawyers should care about their reputations. But exactly what sort of reputation should lawyers seek to establish and maintain in the largely nontransparent context of legal negotiation? And even if a lawyer has developed a reputation as a negotiator, how will he/she know what it is and how it came to be?I force my students to grapple with these questions by incorporating the issues of reputation and reputation development into my negotiation/mediation course. I introduced this innovation at the same time that I decided to increase my focus on developing students' skills in distributive (or value‐claiming) negotiation. Although legal negotiation certainly offers frequent opportunities for the creation of integrative joint and individual gains, the process will almost inevitably involve distribution. The pie, once baked, must be cut.As a result, I now base a portion of my students' final grade on the objective results they achieve in two negotiation simulations. Two dangers of this assessment choice are that it can encourage students to focus only on the numbers and, even worse, engage in “sharp practice”— an extreme form of hard bargaining that tests ethical boundaries — in order to achieve the best short‐term distributive outcomes. Of course, neither a quantitative focus nor sharp practice is synonymous with a distributive approach to negotiation. Nonetheless, to counterbalance the temptations posed by the focus on, and ranking of, objective results, I also base part of students' final grades on their scores on a “Reputation Index.” These scores are based on students' nominations of their peers, accompanied by explanatory comments.This article describes the Reputation Index and how I use it. It also explores the empirical support for the validity of the Reputation Index as a tool for simulating the development and assessment of lawyers' reputations in the “real world.” To that end, the article considers research regarding the bases for lawyers' perceptions of effectiveness in legal negotiation, the sometimes counterintuitive distinction between negotiation “approach” and negotiation “style,” and the relationships among perceptions of negotiation style, procedural justice, trustworthiness, and reputation.

HiTrust: building cross-organizational trust relationship based on a hybrid negotiation tree

In a pervasive computing environment, the need to establish trust amongst distributed services has attracted increasing attentions from both the industry and academia. As a widely adopted solution to carry a principal's identity and attributes of different organizations, the credential-based trust establishment has become popular over Internet. In this paper, we propose a hybrid negotiation tree based modeling approach, named HiTrust, to build cross-organizational trust relationship. The HiTrust is used to characterize the gradual interactions state during the trust establishment between the principals from different security organizations. Compared with the original disclosure tree model, the hybrid tree model in HiTrust can embed both policies and credential sets in a tree node, and is able to describe fine-grained security policy with attributes or negotiation context information. This property endows the HiTrust with the capability of describing complex trust establishment requirements, and makes it more efficient to search desired tree node. Furthermore, to enhance the usability and efficiency of negotiation service, we propose a session state maintenance mechanism based on a policy stack and an asynchronous trust chain propagation mechanism. We have implemented the HiTrust prototype system, and experimentally verified that the HiTrust is effective and scalable.

Your Good Name: The Relationship Between Perceived Reputational Risk and Acceptability of Negotiation Tactics

Reputation serves important functions in social interactions. As a result, negotiators should be concerned about protecting their reputations. Using an online experiment with 343 respondents, we examined the impact of perceived reputational risk on the acceptability of potentially questionable tactics. Consistent with and extending previous findings, we found that, the more reputational risk negotiators perceive, the less acceptable they find the tactics to be. In addition, in the business negotiation context, females generally viewed questionable tactics as more reputationally risky and consequently less acceptable than did males, especially when they were primed to think of themselves as being powerful. We end our paper with discussions on contributions and implications of the findings.

Improving the future by considering the past: The impact of upward counterfactual reflection and implicit beliefs on negotiation performance

Reflecting on previous experiences and considering how things could have been better ( upward counterfactual reflection) is central to learning. While researchers have identified a number of situational antecedents to upward counterfactual generation, less is known about individual differences in counterfactual reflection. We address this gap by considering how implicit beliefs regarding the fixedness or malleability of basic characteristics influence counterfactual generation. In a negotiation context, we show that individuals who believe that negotiation ability is changeable are more likely to consider how things could have been better following a negotiation experience compared to individuals who believe that negotiation ability is fixed. We further demonstrate the impact of upward counterfactual reflection on learning and performance: Negotiators who hold malleable beliefs are better able to discover creative agreements that benefit both parties in a negotiation, and these performance differences are mediated by upward counterfactual generation.

Effect of Auditor Negotiation Experience and Client Negotiating Style on Auditors' Judgments in an Auditor-Client Negotiation Context

SUMMARY In this paper, we present the results of an experiment that investigates the effects of two factors—auditors' negotiation experience and client negotiation style—on auditors' perceived ultimate negotiation outcome in terms of an asset impairment writedown. We show that negotiation experience leads to a higher perceived ultimate negotiated writedown for a client with a contentious negotiation style, suggesting that negotiation experience reaps benefits when it is needed most (i.e., when the client is difficult to deal with). Negotiation experience has no effect for a client with a collaborative negotiation style. We also find that the effect of client negotiation style on auditors' perceived negotiation outcome is contingent on the auditors' negotiation experience. Inexperienced auditors perceive a lower ultimate negotiated writedown when dealing with a contentious rather than a collaborative negotiation style client. In contrast, experienced auditors' perceived negotiation writedown is not affected by the client negotiation style. Data Availability: Contact the authors.

Negotiating lean

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to analyse how negotiations between the constituencies affect the processes and outcomes of lean projects in Danish public sector organisations.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a qualitative analysis of interviews with managers and employees who have participated in lean projects in the Danish public sector. Negotiated order theory serves as the overarching theoretical framework for the analysis.FindingsThe paper concludes that the processes and outcomes of lean depend not only on the technology itself, but also the negotiation context in which the planning and implementation of lean projects take place. Lean implementation is not a neutral and value‐free activity; it is fluid and open for multiple interpretations, interests, and logics.Research limitations/implicationsThe project is based on qualitative data from lean projects in the Danish public sector. It cannot be concluded that the findings can be generalised to reflect all types of lean projects across organisational and geographical settings.Originality/valueThe paper adds value to the relatively scarce literature on lean management in the public sector by exploring how negotiative processes influence the planning, implementation, and maintenance/development of lean projects.

The Alliance of Gastronomy & Negotiation: A Historical Approach

The Art of Gastronomy implements the connection of senses and delights in the most complete and highest standard manner for an extraordinary experience. Despite a broad tourism and hospitality approach of gastronomy study, to our knowledge, no research has been undertaken on the role of gastronomy in negotiation.The 17th and 18th centuries saw numerous works published about international negotiation and the activities of ambassadors by diplomats like Hotman de Villiers, Mazarin, Wicquefort, Callieres, Pecquet, de Wicquefort or Barthelemy de Felice. These texts describe how an ambassador should act as a representative for his Prince and the use of gastronomy. Gastronomy was always central to Talleyrand’s negotiations. With Careme behind him, Talleyrand conclusively proved a theory he had long held: eating was a form of government and thanks to his team (chef, butler, and darling) he created a better relationship with the negotiators and coalitions.This paper looks at the alliance of gastronomy and negotiation with an historical approach. Talleyrand’s use of the gastronomic dinner as an influential context for negotiation, and dining as a metaphor for negotiation. In conclusion, the paper will examine the limits of this approach but also the interest to use gastronomy for negotiations in order to create a special kind of relationship and emotions.

Determinants of lean success and failure in the Danish public sector

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the determinants of lean implementation in Danish public sector organisations. It is proposed to structure the paper around a theoretical model based on a negotiated order perspective.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on interviews with 29 managers and employees from Danish public sector organisations who have been involved in the planning and implementation of lean projects over the past few years.FindingsThe paper identifies a number of factors within the structural context and the negotiation context which are deemed important for the fate of lean projects in the public sector.Originality/valueThe qualitative study brings new insights into the debate on the barriers and success factors in the lean transformation process in the public sector.

Diplomacy and Scribal Culture: Venice and Florence, Two Cultures of Political Writings

How useful is it to apply the notion of scribal culture in the field of political history? This article examines the role of written culture in light of its relations with two different modes of political expression: the voice and the printed word. In order to identify the options available to the authorities in the ancien régime, it compares the areas where manuscripts were used in the Republic of Venice and the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, two states where literary and political controversies broke out in different ways. Until the mid-seventeenth century, Tuscany had a prudent tradition of censoring official writings, while Venice fought in the Interdict controversy of 1606–07. The context of intense political negotiations in the years 1642–43, when the two states eventually concluded a league, allows us to highlight the clash between two different political cultures with specific reference to scribal culture.

Cooperation and Trust for Americans, Power and Relationship for Chinese: In Search of More Culturally Relevant Features of Negotiator Mentality

We define negotiation mentality as a negotiator’s general understanding and belief about the nature, context, and effective approaches of negotiation. In a comprehensive cross-cultural study, we investigate the etic and emic features of negotiators’ mentality. We theorize that how an individual perceives and understands a negotiation is both etic (universal) and emic (culture-specific). We developed a scale to measure negotiators’ mentality (Study 1), and examined the effects of its specific dimensions on negotiation outcomes (Study 2). In Study 1, we found three etic or universal dimensions across both Chinese and American negotiators, in addition, two emic dimensions are found among the U.S. negotiators and three emic dimensions among Chinese negotiators. In Study 2, we validated the developed scale and examined the relationships between the etic and emic dimensions and negotiation outcomes. We found that although the etic factors of cooperation and trust are relevant in predicting negotiation behaviors for both American and Chinese negotiators, their effects are much stronger for the Americans. For Chinese negotiators, the emic factors of power, relational concern, and open discussion are more powerful predictors of negotiation outcome than the etic factors of cooperation and trust. Our research contributes to cross-cultural negotiation research by establishing both etic and emic constructs and scales of negotiation mentality and shedding light on the necessity of investigating the proximal factors influencing negotiation processes and outcomes, especially the potential of emic factors in non-U.S. contexts.

The Competing Roles of Middle Management: Negotiated Order In the Context of Change

This article explores literature on middle managers and the competing roles they play during implementation of change, and presents theory of negotiated order as a framework for further understanding these challenges. Theory of negotiated order highlights social order as emerging from the process of negotiation regarding how work is organized on a day-to-day basis. The article builds upon existing middle management studies by focusing on how roles are negotiated and, in particular, explores the negotiation processes through which middle managers move to manage competing roles. The article argues that management scholars seeking to use theory of negotiated order should focus specifically on characteristics of the negotiation context, as well as social and structural contexts in which order is negotiated. It is also argued that empirical research take specific contextual factors into consideration as well as be conducted at three levels in which middle managers negotiate order: new ways of working, negotiation within the self, and negotiation of boundaries in which middle managers can legitimately negotiate. This information could provide insight into why middle managers engage in the decision-making strategies or activities that they do, or why they do not take a certain course of action in implementing change allowing management researchers to better tailor management strategies to specific organizational environments. Although theory of negotiated order promises new insights into middle management challenges during change, the challenges associated with using this approach are also acknowledged and discussed.

Negotiation Process and Negotiation Context

AbstractThis article examines how external events grounded in a negotiation’s relevant environment (i.e., negotiation context) influence negotiation process and outcome. Multilateral, regional and bilateral environments are examined through linkage theory to gain understanding about the impact of external events or context on negotiation process and outcome. Linkages between a negotiation and its context are examined through five trade negotiations: the WTO Doha round (multilateral-global); the Free Trade Area of the Americas (multilateral-regional); EU‐Mercosur (bilateral-regional); EU‐Chile (bilateral); and US‐Chile (bilateral). In addition to developing greater understanding about the strategic relationship between a negotiation and its context this article establishes a theoretic framework that defines the known universe of linkage dynamics. The impact of multilateral environments on the regional negotiation process and outcome is of particular interest, as is the strategic use of bilateral environments in seeking to achieve multilateral geopolitical ends.

A study of teacher/student relations in a formal face-to-face university context supported by online tools within an enactive approach

The university didactics now requires a re-examination both in terms of objectives, and in terms of didactical formats. If the objective is to enable students to develop a professional habitus, the hypothesis is that the use of a situated approach and the presence of contexts of negotiation supported by new technologies can be effective. This paper analyses the relations that occurred within the “General Didactic” course at the Faculty of Education (University of Macerata) with more than 200 students and identifies the role of interactions in both an online environment and in the face-to-face class context in order to understand the evolution of the system according to an enactive approach.