Search results

1 – 10 of over 2000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 February 1990

Frank Tutzauer

This paper explores the relationship between integrative potential, information exchange, and behavioral and perceptual indicators of negotiation outcome. A measure of…

Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between integrative potential, information exchange, and behavioral and perceptual indicators of negotiation outcome. A measure of integrative potential is introduced that allows the researcher to quantify how much potential for integrativeness is contained in various bargaining scenarios. An experiment using a variant of Pruitt's (1981) bargaining scenario was conducted to investigate the usefulness of the measure. In particular, competitiveness interacted with information exchange to affect joint benefit. It is concluded that integrative potential can help develop useful theories of integrative bargaining.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 1 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 4 October 2011

Dan Kirk, Gabriele Oettingen and Peter M. Gollwitzer

This paper aims to test the impact of several self‐regulatory strategies on an integrative bargaining task.

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to test the impact of several self‐regulatory strategies on an integrative bargaining task.

Design/methodology/approach

Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in one of three self‐regulation strategies, based upon fantasy realization theory (FRT): to mentally contrast a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining, to exclusively elaborate on successful future agreement, or to exclusively elaborate on the reality of bargaining. Those in the control condition merely began the negotiation.

Findings

Mentally contrasting a successful future agreement with the reality of bargaining leads dyads to reach the largest and most equitable joint agreements, compared to dyads that elaborate only on successful future agreement, or on the reality of bargaining.

Research limitations/implications

Since it was found that mental contrasting promotes integrative agreement, it is important to learn more about the psychological processes that mediate and moderate this effect. Another related line of research would examine the application of the findings to other bargaining scenarios. One further future line of research should combine mental contrasting with planning strategies.

Originality/value

The findings of the paper have implications for both self‐regulation and negotiation research. The result that mental contrasting fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help negotiators effectively discriminate among feasible and unfeasible components of a multi‐faceted goal (integrative agreement). For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self‐regulatory strategy for producing high‐quality agreements.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 22 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 19 April 2013

Dan Kirk, Gabriele Oettingen and Peter M. Gollwitzer

The present experiment aimed to test the impact of a self‐regulatory strategy of goal pursuit – called mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) – on an…

Abstract

Purpose

The present experiment aimed to test the impact of a self‐regulatory strategy of goal pursuit – called mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) – on an integrative bargaining task.

Design/methodology/approach

Participants were randomly assigned to dyads and negotiated over the sale of a car. Before negotiating, participants were prompted to engage in MCII, or one or the other of its two component strategies: to contrast mentally achieving success in the integrative bargaining task with the reality standing in the way of this success (MC), to form implementation intentions on how to bargain (i.e. if‐then plans) (II), or both to contrast mentally and form implementation intentions (MCII).

Findings

The strategy of mental contrasting with implementation intentions led dyads to reach the largest joint agreements, compared to dyads that only used mental contrasting or if‐then plans. Moreover, participants who mentally contrasted formed more cooperative implementation intentions than participants who did not mentally contrast, mediating the effect of condition on joint gain.

Research limitations/implications

The findings suggest that the self‐regulatory strategy of mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) leads to higher joint gain, and that this effect is mediated by mental contrasting's promotion of cooperative planning. More research should be done to understand the specific negotiation behaviors engendered by MCII, as well as its applicability to other negotiation scenarios.

Originality/value

These findings have implications for both self‐regulation and negotiation research. The result that MCII fosters integrative solutions reflects its potential to help people form cooperative plans and reach high joint‐value agreements in integrative scenarios. For negotiation research, the paper identifies an effective self‐regulatory strategy for producing high‐quality agreements.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 24 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 8 June 2007

Nabil Elias and William W. Notz

Like conflict in general, budgetary conflict is perceived by conflicting parties as a zero-sum game or distributive: one party's gain is the other party's loss. We…

Abstract

Like conflict in general, budgetary conflict is perceived by conflicting parties as a zero-sum game or distributive: one party's gain is the other party's loss. We identify an organizational culture that promotes this view as “traditional.” We propose that changing certain elements of organizational culture is sufficient to produce more integrative, nonzero-sum outcomes. We call this changed organizational culture “empowering.” We propose and test the effects of an empowering organizational culture (EOC) in contrast to the traditional organizational culture (TOC). We hypothesize that an EOC would produce more integrative conflict resolution than the typical TOC. Based on our review of the literature, we identify two elements of the EOC that are essential in producing more integrative solutions to budgetary conflict. The two elements that we simultaneously manipulate are the superior's empowering style (or lack thereof) as reflected in encouragement to freely negotiate, and the superior's intervention process in failed negotiations (a process that encourages the search for integrative solutions and avoids imposed compromises that dampen the desire to negotiate). Using a laboratory experiment, 84 subjects forming 42 dyads negotiated the allocation of discretionary budgets face-to-face. The results of the experiment confirm our hypotheses that the EOC produces more integrative budget negotiation outcomes, greater convergence, and greater satisfaction with the outcome than TOC.

Details

Advances in Management Accounting
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-7623-1387-7

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 October 2000

Ian Roper

This article explores the implementation of quality management initiatives in four local authorities and considers how far such a scenario offers a possibility for social…

Abstract

This article explores the implementation of quality management initiatives in four local authorities and considers how far such a scenario offers a possibility for social partnership between management and trade unions. Although no collective bargaining processes are defined in the social partnership model, it is contended here that the implied collective bargaining model in social partnership is Walton and McKersie’s “integrative bargaining” model. It is further contended that the scenario of implementing quality management in local government offers all the preconditions for integrative bargaining to take place – both in terms of the legitimate presence of recognised unions and through the pursuit of an issue in which management, staff and trade unions may have mutual interests. In practice, however, conditions for integrative bargaining outcomes did not emerge. Evidence for this was based on assessing senior manager and union branch official opinions through interviews, and on survey responses from Unison members.

Details

Employee Relations, vol. 22 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0142-5455

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 9 August 2013

Boniface Michael and Rashmi Michael

The purpose of this paper is to draw on previous research and propose a framework for evaluating interest‐based bargaining (IBB) around three criteria: efficient, amicable…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to draw on previous research and propose a framework for evaluating interest‐based bargaining (IBB) around three criteria: efficient, amicable and wise, where mutual gains are not self‐evident.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper reviews both survey and case study research on IBB in the USA and Canada. Based on trends discerned in the data, the paper uses the three criteria to present research and propositions on evaluating the IBB process.

Findings

IBB connects front stage acts by negotiators during collective bargaining with backstage environments and fosters collaboration hinging on dialogue across competing values involving online and offline processes during negotiations. Where mutual gains are not self evident, there these findings underpin criteria for evaluating the IBB process’s potential to serve enduring values of industrial democracy and employee voice and the newer values of collaboration and partnership in strategic decision making.

Research limitations/implications

The amicable criterion predisposes the framework favorably towards amicable relations, which creates a favorable bias within the framework towards the IBB process when compared to other bargaining processes. There is a need for updated quantitative data on IBB trends at a national level, similar to the three FMCS surveys last reported in 2004, and a need for institutional linkages that will increase case study research on IBB, similar to recent research on Kaiser Permanente.

Practical implications

Negotiators, trainers and policy makers will gain from the criteria listed here to evaluate IBB where mutual gains are not self‐evident.

Originality/value

The framework presented in the paper advances an original framework to evaluate IBB.

Details

Employee Relations, vol. 35 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0142-5455

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 April 2000

Nimet Beriker‐Atiyas and Tijen Demirel‐Pegg

The nature of the negotiated outcomes of the eight issues of the Dayton Peace Agreement was studied in terms of their integrative and distributive aspects. In cases where…

Abstract

The nature of the negotiated outcomes of the eight issues of the Dayton Peace Agreement was studied in terms of their integrative and distributive aspects. In cases where integrative elements were found, further analysis was conducted by concentrating on Pruitt's five types of integrative solutions: expanding the pie, cost cutting, non‐specific compensation, logrolling, and bridging. The results showed that real world international negotiations can arrive at integrative agreements even when they involve redistribution of resources (in this case the redistribution of former Yugoslavia). Another conclusion was that an agreement can consist of several distributive outcomes and several integrative outcomes produced by different kinds of mechanisms. Similarly, in single issues more than one mechanism can be used simultaneously. Some distributive bargaining was needed in order to determine how much compensation was required. Finally, each integrative formula had some distributive aspects as well.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 11 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 April 1996

William Ross and Jessica LaCroix

The present paper reviews the research literature on trust in bargaining and mediation. Several models of trust within the bargaining process are also described. It is…

Abstract

The present paper reviews the research literature on trust in bargaining and mediation. Several models of trust within the bargaining process are also described. It is concluded that trust means different things, depending upon the relationship under investigation. Trust among negotiators can refer to a personality trail (how trusting a negotiator is of others) or to a temporary state. Within the state perspective, trust often refers to one of three orientations: (1) cooperative motivational orientation (MO), (2) patterns of predictable behavior, (3) a problem‐solving orientation. Trust between a negotiator and constituents usually refers to a cooperative MO (i.e., shared loyalty) between these two groups. The addition of a mediator can impact both the opposing negotiators' relationship and each negotiator‐constituent relationship; the mediator also has direct and indirect relationships with the parties and their constituents. Future directions for research on trust are identified.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 7 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 March 1978

Terry Sullivan

Industrial relations can be said to be concerned with who makes the rules relating to employment matters, what rules will exist and how any adjustments to such rules will…

Abstract

Industrial relations can be said to be concerned with who makes the rules relating to employment matters, what rules will exist and how any adjustments to such rules will be made. In a large number of industrial relations systems the process of adjustment is by collective bargaining, and most industrial relations commentators and practitioners would accept that the scope for adjustment is constrained by economic, social and political forces. However, the practicalities and dynamics of this adjustment process are such that decisions can only be in terms of what Williamson calls ‘bounded rationality’. This is a situation where at the moment of decision, given the quantity and quality of information that is held, that decision seems rational and acceptable. However, innate imperfections in information and its flow eventually show the decision to be something less than satisfactory. Further, many writers believe that collective bargaining is characterised by management and labour having, at the very least, potentially conflicting objectives so that for each ‘bounded rationality’ is different. The practical results are often some ‘compromise’ or ‘optimal’ outcome that temporarily satisfies the welfare of the parties but can rarely maximise it. However, we should note that while the parties may reach a jointly satisfactory outcome, that outcome could be less than optimal for society as a whole; an inflationary wage settlement is the most obvious example.

Details

Personnel Review, vol. 7 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0048-3486

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 February 1999

Thomas A. O’Donoghue and Simon Clarke

The traditional system of industrial relations in Australia has emphasised arbitrated decisions by central tribunals in order to achieve uniform wage increases without any…

Abstract

The traditional system of industrial relations in Australia has emphasised arbitrated decisions by central tribunals in order to achieve uniform wage increases without any consideration being given to productivity. Since the late 1980s, there has been a move towards negotiation at the enterprise level. Legislative reforms have occurred at both federal and state levels which present opportunities for individual enterprises to negotiate agreements defining terms and conditions considered to be most appropriate for their circumstances. One major arena where this development, popularly known as enterprise bargaining, is impacting, is that of education. Focuses on the phenomenon by: considering some of the literature on the theoretical and conceptual dimensions of the underlying notion of “bargaining”; outlining the general policy context within which enterprise bargaining has been taking place in Australia; presenting an overview of the emerging research base on award restructuring and enterprise‐based bargaining; outlining the need for research aimed at understanding participants’ perceptions of enterprise bargaining and of their experiences of the bargaining process; examining a major approach to engaging in such research, namely, the micro‐political approach.

Details

International Journal of Educational Management, vol. 13 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-354X

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 2000