Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Negotiation Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Business Project Management and Marketing

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Business and Economics ((STBE))

Abstract

Transactions in the industrial plant and project business are generally concluded by negotiations between the purchasing organization and the supplier company. The outcomes of these negotiations are predominantly responsible for determining the profitability of the order for the supplier and the benefits and quality of the solution for the purchaser. This chapter provides an overview of the characteristics of the negotiation situation in the industrial plant and project business with regard to the aspects of time, organization and content. The current modeling in relation to negotiation situations is then presented, which distinguishes between distributive and integrative negotiations. The customary measures for assessing the success of negotiations are also discussed: negotiated gains, efficiency and satisfaction. This chapter focuses on the consideration of influencing factors on negotiations, which can be broken down into static context and personnel factors as well as dynamic determinants, i.e. psychological and interaction processes. Both their characteristics and effects are presented and they are also discussed from the current theoretical perspectives. The section at the end of the chapter is dedicated to specific preparatory measures that a negotiating party can take in order to ensure that they receive the greatest possible benefit from negotiations in the project and industrial plant business.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literature

  • Adair, W. L. (2003). Integrative sequences and negotiation outcome in same- and mixed-culture negotiations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 14(3/4), 273–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adair, W. L., & Brett, J. M. (2005). The negotiation dance: Time, culture, and behavioral sequences in negotiation. Organization Science, 16(1), 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adair, W. L., Okumura, T., & Brett, J. M. (2001). Negotiation behavior when cultures collide: The United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adair, W. L., Weingart, L., & Brett, J. (2007). The timing and function of offers in U.S. and Japanese negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1056–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, N. J., Brahm, R., & Graham, J. L. (1992). Strategy implementation: A comparison of face-to-face negotiations in the People’s Republic of China and the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 13(6), 449–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allred, K. G., Mallozi, J. S., Matsui, F., & Raia, C. P. (1997). The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70(3), 175–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, E., Marshall, D., Fynes, B., & Lynch, D. (2008). Communication media selection in buyer-supplier relationships. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 28(4), 360–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., & Thompson, L. L. (2004). Affect from top down: How powerful individuals’ positive affect shapes negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95(2), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arunachalam, V., Wall, J. A., & Chan, C. (1998). Hong Kong versus U.S. negotiations: Effects of culture, alternatives, outcome scales, and mediation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(14), 1219–1244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacharach, S. B., & Lawler, E. J. (1976). The perception of power. Social Forces, 55, 123–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacharach, S. B., & Lawler, E. J. (1981a). Bargaining: Power, tactics, and outcomes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacharach, S. B., & Lawler, E. J. (1981b). Power and tactics in bargaining. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 34(2), 219–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K., & Günter, B. (1976). A phase-differentiated interaction approach to industrial marketing decisions. Industrial Marketing Management, 5, 255–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K., van Doorn, J., & Wilken, R. (2008). The impact of team characteristics on the course and outcome of intergroup price negotiations. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 15(4), 365–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K., & Voeth, M. (2010). Industriegütermarketing (9th ed.). Munich: Vahlen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B. (2008). Negotiator affect: The State of the art (and the science). Group Decision and Negotiation, 17(1), 97–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., & Friedman, R. A. (1998). Bargainer characteristics in distributive and integrative negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 345–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., & Oliver, R. L. (1996). Affect in dyadic negotiation: A model and propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(2), 127–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. H. (2002). Judgment in managerial decision making (5th ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. H., Neale, M. A., Valley, K. L., Zajac, E. J., & Kim, Y. M. (1992). The effect of agents and mediators on negotiation outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53(1), 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beersma, B., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (1999). Negotiation processes and outcomes in prosocially and egoistically motivated groups. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10(4), 385–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blount, S., Thomas-Hunt, M. C., & Neale, M. A. (1996). The price is right – or is it? A reference point model of two-party price negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brett, J. M., & Okumura, T. (1998). Inter- and intracultural negotiation: U.S. and Japanese negotiators. Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 495–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodt, S. E., & Marla, T. (2000). Working together but in opposition: An examination of the “good-cop/badcop” negotiation team tactic. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 81(2), 155–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodt, S., & Thompson, L. (2001). Negotiating teams: A levels of analysis approach. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(3), 208–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, B. W., & Rose, R. L. (2004). A contextual model of negotiation orientation. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(2), 125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., & Baer, M. (2011). Location in negotiation: Is there a home field advantage? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114(2), 190–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, A., Wilson, R., & Drake, E. (2000). Culture in the context of intercultural negotiation. Human Communication Research, 26(4), 591–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, N. C. G., Graham, J. L., Jolibert, A., & Meissner, H. G. (1988). Marketing negotiations in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Journal of Marketing, 52(2), 49–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cano, C. R., Boles, J. S., & Bean, C. J. (2005). Communication media preferences in business-to-business transactions: An examination of the purchase process. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 25(3), 283–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. (2008). Positive affect and decision frame in negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17(1), 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. J. D., & Isen, A. M. (1986). The influence of positive affect and visual access on the discovery of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. J. D., & Lawler, E. J. (1986). Time pressure and the development of integrative agreements in bilateral negotiations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30(4), 636–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. (1993). Influence – The psychology of persuasion (2nd ed.). New York: Quill William Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Citera, M., Beauregard, R., & Mitsuya, T. (2005). An experimental study of credibility in E-negotiations. Psychology and Marketing, 22(2), 163–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levin, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cotter, M. J., & Henley, J. A. (2008). First-offer disadvantage in zero-sum game negotiation outcomes. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 15(1), 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croson, R. T. A. (1999). Look at me when you say that: An electronic negotiation simulation. Simulation and Gaming, 30(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., Elfenbein, H. A., & Kilduff, G. J. (2009). Getting off on the right foot: Subjective value versus economic value in predicting longitudinal job outcomes from job offer negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 524–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., Neale, M. A., Ross, L., & Rosencranz-Engelmann, J. (2008). Relational accommodation in negotiation: Effects of egalitarianism and gender on economic efficiency and relational capital. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 107(2), 192–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., Neale, M. A., & Ross, L. (2004). Dynamic valuation: Preference changes in the context of face-to-face negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(2), 142–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., & Overbeck, J. R. (2008). Making a positive impression in a negotiation: Gender differences in response to impression motivation. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 1(2), 179–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curhan, J. R., Xu, H., & Elfenbein, H. A. (2006). What do people value when they negotiate? Mapping the domain of subjective value in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(3), 493–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organization information requirements, media richness, and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W. (2004). Motivation in negotiation: A social psychological analysis. In M. J. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp. 114–138). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., & Boles, T. L. (1998). Share and share alike or winner take all? The influence of social value orientation upon choice and recall of negotiation heuristics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(3), 253–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Carnevale, P. J. D., Emans, B. J. M., & Van de Vliert, E. (1994). Effects of gain-loss frames in negotiation: Loss aversion, mismatching, and frame adoption. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(1), 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. W., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (1995). Impact of social value orientation on negotiator cognition and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(11), 1178–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008). Media, tasks, and communication processes: A theory of media synchronicity. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 575–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRue, D. S., Conlon, D. E., Moon, H., & Willaby, H. W. (2009). When is straightforwardness a liability in negotiations? The role of integrative potential and structural power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 1032–1047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimotakis, N., Conlon, D. E., & Ilies, R. (2012). The mind and heart (literally) of the negotiator: Personality and contextual determinants of experiential reactions and economic outcomes in negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 183–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dion, P. A., & Banting, P. M. (1988). Industrial supplier-buyer negotiations. Industrial Marketing Management, 17(1), 43–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, W. A. (1981). Analyzing negotiation tactics: Development of a negotiation interact system. Human Communication Research, 7(3), 273–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, D., & Olekalns, M. (2008). Emotions in negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, F. R., & Walker, O. C. (1981). Bargaining in an asymmetric power structure. Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 104–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27(1), 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelhardt, W. H., & Günter, B. (1981). Investitionsgütermarketing. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassina, N. E. (2004). Constraining a principal’s choice: Outcome versus behavior contingent agency contracts in representative negotiations. Negotiation Journal, 20(3), 435–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1992). Getting to yes – Negotiating agreement without giving (2nd ed.). London: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouraker, L. E., & Siegel, S. (1963). Bargaining behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fry, W. R., Firestone, I. J., & Williams, D. L. (1983). Negotiation process and outcome of stranger dyads and dating couples: Do lovers lose? Basic and Applied Psychology, 4(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funder, D. C. (2001). Personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 197–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galin, A., Gross, M., & Gosalker, G. (2007). E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation: What has changed – if anything? Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 787–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, A. D., & Mussweiler, T. (2001). First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 657–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, A. D., Seiden, V. L., Kim, P. H., & Medvec, V. H. (2002). The dissatisfaction of having your first offer accepted: The role of counterfactual thinking in negotiations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(2), 271–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, I. (2007). Industrielle Verhandlungen - Empirische Untersuchung von Verhandlungsmacht und -interaktion in Einzeltransaktion und Geschäftsbeziehung. Wiesbaden: DUV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, I. (2014). Media effects on the formation of negotiator satisfaction: The example of face-to-face and text based electronically mediated negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23(4), 735–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, I., & Kleinaltenkamp, M. (2011). Interne Umsetzung des Geschäftsbeziehungsmanagements. In M. Kleinaltenkamp, W. Plinke, I. Geiger, F. Jacob, & A. Söllner (Eds.), Geschäftsbeziehungsmanagement (pp. 255–258). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, M. J., Major, V. S., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L. H., & O’Brien, K. (2006). Negotiating relationally: The dynamics of the relational self in negotiations. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 427–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giebels, E., De Dreu, C. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (1998). The alternative negotiator as the invisible third at the table: The impact of potency information. International Journal of Conflict Management, 9(1), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giebels, E., De Dreu, C. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (2000). Interdependence in negotiation: Effects of exit options and social motive on distributive and integrative negotiation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(2), 255–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, J. J., Brett, J. M., & Weingart, L. R. (2000). Interdependence, social motives, and outcome satisfaction in multiparty negotiation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(6), 779–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J. L. (1986). The problem-solving approach to negotiations in industrial marketing. Journal of Business Research, 14(6), 549–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J. L., Kim, D. K., Lin, C.-Y., & Robinson, M. (1988). Buyer-seller negotiations around the Pacific Rim: Differences in fundamental exchange processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(1), 48–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh, L., & Chapman, D. I. (1998). Negotiator relationships: Construct measurement, and demonstration of their impact on the process and outcomes of negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 7(6), 465–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halevy, N. (2008). Team negotiation: Social, epistemic, economic, and psychological consequences of subgroup conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1687–1702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilty, J. A., & Carnevale, P. J. D. (1993). Black-hat/white-hat strategy in bilateral negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55(3), 444–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture’s consequences (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R., & Javidan, M. (2004). Overview of GLOBE. In R. House, P. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations – The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 9–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, V. L., & Neale, M. A. (1986). Effects of cognitive heuristics and goals on negotiator performance and subsequent goal setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38(3), 342–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hüffmeier, J., Freund, A., Zerres, A., Backhaus, K., & Hertel, G. (2014). Being tough or being nice? A meta-analysis on the impact of hard- and softline strategies in distributive negotiations. Journal of Management 40(3), 866–892.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutt, M. D., Johnston, W. J., & Ronchetto, J. (1985). Selling centers and buying centers: Formulating strategic exchange patterns. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 5(1), 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imai, L., & Gelfand, M. J. (2010). The culturally intelligent negotiator: The impact of cultural intelligence (CQ) on negotiation sequences and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112(2), 83–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, W. J., & Bonoma, T. V. (1981). The buying center: Structure and interaction patterns. Journal of Marketing, 45, 143–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamins, M. A., Johnston, W. J., & Graham, J. L. (1998). A multi-method examination of buyer-seller interactions among Japanese and American businesspeople. Journal of International Marketing, 6(1), 8–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, P. A., & Carnevale, P. J. D. (1989). Positive effects of within-group cooperation on between-group negotiation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19(12), 977–992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, H. H. (1966). A classroom study of dilemmas in interpersonal negotiation. In K. Archibald (Ed.), Strategic interaction and conflict. Berkeley, CA: Institute of International Studies, University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, G. E. (2001). Modeling distributive and integrative negotiations. Review and revised characterization. Group Decision and Negotiation, 10(2), 493–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, G. E., & Lai, H. (2007). Negotiation support and E-negotiation systems: An overview. Group Decision and Negotiation, 16(6), 553–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P. H. (1997). Strategic timing in group negotiations: The implication of forced entry and forced exit for negotiators with unequal power. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71(3), 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, M. J., Pruitt, D. G., Magenau, J. M., Konar-Goldband, E., & Carnevale, P. J. (1980). Effects of trust, aspiration and gender on negotiation tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, F.-K. (1987). Verhandlungen bei der Vermarktung von Investitionsgütern. Dissertation, Darmstadt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koeszegi, S., Pesendorfer, E.-M., & Vetschera, R. (2011). Data-driven phase analysis of E-negotiations: An exemplary study of synchronous and asynchronous negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 20(4), 385–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman, S., & Rosette, A. S. (2008). Cultural variation in response to strategic emotions in negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17(1), 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman, S., Rosette, A. S., & Thompson, L. (2006). The three faces of eve: Strategic displays of positive, negative, and neutral emotions in negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99(1), 81–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kray, L. J., Galinsky, A. D., & Thompson, L. (2002). Reversing the gender gap in negotiations: An exploration of stereotype regeneration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(2), 386–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kray, L. J., & Thompson, L. (2005). Gender stereotypes and negotiation performance: An examination of theory and research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 103–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kray, L. J., Thompson, L., & Galinsky, A. D. (2001). Battle of sexes: Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 942–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuß, A. (1977). Competitive-Bidding-Modelle. Zeitschrift für betriebswirschaftliche Forschung, 29, 63–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutschker, M. (1972). Verhandlungen als Elemente eines verhaltenswissenschaftlichen Bezugsrahmens des Investitionsgütermarketing. Dissertation, Mannheim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutschker, M., & Kirsch, W. (1978). Verhandlungen in Multiorganisationalen Entscheidungsprozessen. Munich: University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, S., & Weingart, L. R. (2004). Unilateral concessions from the other party: Concession behavior, attributions, and negotiation judgments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 263–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1993). Power and the emergence of commitment behavior in negotiated exchange. American Sociological Review, 58(4), 465–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). The manager as negotiator. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2010). Negotiation (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M. (2009). The intrapersonal and interpersonal effects of anger on negotiation strategies: A cross-cultural investigation. Human Communication Research, 35, 148–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maaravi, Y., Ganzach, Y., & Pazy, A. (2011). Negotiation as a form of persuasion: Arguments in first offers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 245–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mannix, E. A., & Neale, M. A. (1993). Power imbalance and the pattern of exchange in dyadic negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2(2), 119–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAlister, L., Bazerman, M. H., & Fader, P. (1986). Power and goal setting in channel negotiations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(3), 228–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, J. E., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1993). Putting the ‘group’ back in group support systems: Some theoretical issues about dynamics in groups with technological enhancements. In L. M. Jessup & J. S. Valacich (Eds.), Group support systems: New perspectives (pp. 78–96). New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith – a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55(1), 89–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. A. (2004). The unexpected benefits of final deadlines in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 121–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran, S., & Ritov, I. (2007). Experience in integrative negotiations: What needs to be learned? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(1), 77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, F. S., Silva-Risso, J., & Zettelmeyer, F. (2011). What matters in a price negotiation: Evidence from the U.S. auto retailing industry. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 9, 365–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosterd, I., & Rutte, C. G. (2000). Effects of time pressure and accountability to constituents on negotiation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(3), 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murnighan, J. K., Babcock, L., Thompson, L., & Pillutla, M. (1999). The information dilemma in negotiations: Effects of experience, incentives, and integrative potential. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10(4), 313–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mussweiler, T., Strack, F., & Pfeiffer, T. (2000). Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1142–1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naquin, C. E. (2003). The agony of opportunity in negotiation: Number of negotiable issues, counterfactual thinking, and feelings of satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91(1), 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naquin, C. E., & Kurtzberg, T. R. (2009). Team negotiation and perceptions of trustworthiness: The whole versus the sum of the parts. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 13(2), 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naquin, C. E., & Paulson, G. D. (2003). Online bargaining and interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 113–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, J. F. (1950). The bargaining problem. Econometrica, 18, 155–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, J. F. (1953). Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica, 21, 128–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neale, M. A., & Northcraft, G. B. (1991). Behavioral negotiation theory: A framework for conceptualizing dyadic bargaining. Research in Organizational Behavior, 13, 147–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neu, J., Graham, J. L., & Gilly, M. C. (1988). The influence of gender on behaviors and outcomes in a retail buyer-seller negotiation simulation. Journal of Retailing, 64(4), 427–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neun, H. (2011). Verhandlungen im internationalen Vertrieb. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neun, H., Geiger, I., Lügger, K., & Backhaus, K. (2012). Group and individual level cultural influences in intra- and intercultural negotiation between German and Chinese negotiators. In Proceedings of the 25th IACM Annual Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, K. M. (1997). Groups and solos in context: The effects of accountability on team negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72(3), 384–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, K. M., & Arnold, J. A. (2011). Sabotaging the deal: The way relational concerns undermine negotiators. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1167–1172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, K. M., Arnold, J. A., & Burris, E. R. (2005). Negotiators’ bargaining histories and their effects on future negotiation performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 350–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohbuchi, K.-I., & Fukushima, O. (1997). Personality and interpersonal conflict: Aggressiveness, self-monitoring, and situational variables. International Journal of Conflict Management, 8(2), 99–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2000). Understanding optimal outcomes. Human Communication Research, 24(4), 528–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2003). Testing the relationship among negotiators’ motivational orientations, strategy choices, and outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(2), 101–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olekalns, M., Smith, P. L., & Kibby, R. (1996). Social value orientation and negotiator outcomes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R. L., Balakrishnan, P. V. S., & Barry, B. (1994). Outcome satisfaction in negotiation: A test of expectancy disconfirmation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(2), 252–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Overbeck, J. R., Neale, M. A., & Govan, C. L. (2010). I feel, therefore you act: Intrapersonal and interpersonal effects of emotion on negotiation as a function of social power. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112(2), 126–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, C., & Balakrishnan, P. V. (2010). The impact of expectation of future negotiation interaction on bargaining processes and outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 63(8), 809–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perdue, B. (1992). Ten aggressive bargaining tactics of industrial buyers. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 7(2), 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, E., & Thompson, L. (1997). Negotiation teamwork: The impact of information distribution and accountability on performance depends on the relationship among team members. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72(3), 364–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pietroni, D., Van Kleef, G., Rubaltelli, E., & Rumiati, R. (2009). When happiness pays in negotiation. Mind and Society, 8(1), 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pietroni, D., Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2008). Response modes in negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17(1), 31–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinkley, R. L. (1990). Dimensions of conflict frame: Disputant interpretations of conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2), 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinkley, R. L. (1995). Impact of knowledge regarding alternatives to settlement in dyadic negotiation: Whose knowledge counts? Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(3), 403–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinkley, R. L., & Northcraft, G. B. (1994). Conflict frames of reference: Implications for dispute processes and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1), 193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polzer, J. T. (1996). Intergroup negotiations: The effects of negotiating teams. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 40(4), 678–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G., & Carnevale, P. J. D. (1993). Negotiation in social conflict. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G., & Drews, J. L. (1969). The effect of time pressure, time elapsed, and the opponent’s concession rate on behavior in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(1), 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G., & Lewis, S. A. (1975). Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 621–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purdy, J. M., Nye, P., & Balakrishnan, P. V. (2000). The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(2), 162–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. L., & Holmer, M. (1992). Framing, reframing and issue development. In L. L. Putnam & M. E. Roloff (Eds.), Communication and negotiation (pp. 128–155). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. L., & Roloff, M. E. (1992). Communication perspectives on negotiation. In L. L. Putnam & M. E. Roloff (Eds.), Communication and negotiation (pp. 1–17). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H., Richardson, J., & Metcalfe, D. (2002). Negotiation analysis – The science and art of collaborative decision making. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, J. (2004). Serendipity and the realpolitik of negotiations in supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 9(3), 219–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, J. Z., & Brown, B. R. (1975). The social psychology of bargaining and negotiation. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein, A. (1985). A bargaining model with incomplete information about time preferences. Econometrica, 53, 1150–1172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salacuse, J. W. (1999). Intercultural negotiation in international business. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 217–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T. C. (1960). The strategy of conflict. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweinsberg, M., Ku, G., Wang, C. S., & Pillutla, M. M. (2012). Starting high and ending with nothing: The role of anchors and power in negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 226–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shalvi, S., Moran, S., & Ritov, I. (2010). Overcoming initial anchors: The effect of negotiators’ dispositional control beliefs. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 3(3), 232–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. L., & Bies, R. L. (1994). Threats, bluffs and disclaimers in negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(1), 14–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinaceur, M., & Neale, M. A. (2005). Not all threats are created equal: How implicitness and timing affect the effectiveness of threats in negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 14(1), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinaceur, M., Van Kleef, G. A., Neale, M. A., Adam, H., & Haag, C. (2011). Hot or cold: Is communicating anger or threats more effective in negotiation? Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 1018–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. L., Pruitt, D. G., & Carnevale, P. J. (1982). Matching and mismatching: The effect of own limit, other’s toughness, and time pressure on concession rate in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 876–883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinel, W., Van Kleef, G. A., & Harinck, F. (2008). Are you talking to me?! Separating the people from the problem when expressing emotions in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 362–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Champagne, M. V. (2000). The impact of time pressure and information on negotiation process and decisions. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9(6), 471–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuhlmacher, A., Citera, M., & Willis, T. (2007). Gender differences in virtual negotiation: Theory and research. Sex Roles, 57(5), 329–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuhlmacher, A. F., Gillespie, T. L., & Champagne, M. V. (1998). The impact of time pressure in negotiation: A meta analysis. International Journal of Conflict Management, 9(1), 97–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Walters, A. E. (1999). Gender differences in negotiation outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 653–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. (2005). The mind and heart of the negotiator (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L., & Hastie, R. (1990). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(1), 98–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L., & Hrebec, D. (1996). Lose–lose agreements in interdependent decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 120(3), 396–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L., Peterson, E., & Brodt, S. E. (1996). Team negotiation: An examination of integrative and distributive bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 66–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L., Valley, K. L., & Kramer, R. M. (1995). The bittersweet feeling of success: An examination of social perception in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31(6), 467–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trötschel, R., Hüffmeier, J., Loschelder, D. D., Schwartz, K., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2011). Perspective taking as a means to overcome motivational barriers in negotiations: When putting oneself into the opponent’s shoes helps to walk toward agreements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(4), 771–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ury, W. L., Brett, J. M., & Goldberg, S. B. (1988). Getting disputes resolved. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Utikal, H. (2001). Die Organisation industrieller Geschäftsbeziehungen. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van Boven, L., Gilovich, T., & Medvec, V. H. (2003). The illusion of transparency in negotiations. Negotiation Journal, 19(2), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Boven, L., & Thompson, L. (2003). A look into the mind of the negotiator: Mental models in negotiation. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6(4), 387–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Social value orientation and impression formation: A test of two competing hypotheses about information search in negotiation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13(1), 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2010). Longer-term consequences of anger expression in negotiation: Retaliation or spillover? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 753–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2004). The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 57–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006). Supplication and appeasement in conflict and negotiation: The interpersonal effects of disappointment, worry, guilt, and regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1), 124–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleef, G. A., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2008). What other’s disappointment may do to selfish people: Emotion and social value orientation in a negotiation context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1084–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, R., Kohli, A. K., & Zaltman, G. (1995). Influence strategies in buying centers. Journal of Marketing, 59, 71–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vetschera, R. (2006). Preference structures of negotiators and negotiation outcomes. Group Decision and Negotiation, 15(2), 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vetschera, R., Kersten, G., & Koeszegi, S. (2006). User assessment of internet-based negotiation support systems: An exploratory study. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 16(2), 123–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, A. E., Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Meyer, L. L. (1998). Gender and negotiator competitiveness: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, R. E., & McKersie, R. B. (1965). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, L. R., Brett, J. M., Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2007). Conflicting social motives in negotiating groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 994–1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, L. R., Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2004). Quantitative coding of negotiation processes. International Negotiation, 9(Special Issue on Research Methods in Negotiation and Social Conflict), 441–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, L. R., Thompson, L. L., Bazerman, M. H., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Tactical behavior and negotiation outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1(1), 7–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilken, R., Cornelißen, M., Backhaus, K., & Schmitz, C. (2010). Steering sales reps through cost information: An investigation into the black box of cognitive references and negotiation behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(1), 69–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. J., Bauman, C. W., Chen, N., & Bastardi, A. (2012). The pursuit of missing information in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 88–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zachariassen, F. (2008). Negotiation strategies in supply chain management. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 38(10), 764–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Economics, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Ingmar Geiger

Authors
  1. Ingmar Geiger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ingmar Geiger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Michael Kleinaltenkamp

  2. European School of Management and Technology, Berlin, Germany

    Wulff Plinke

  3. Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Ingmar Geiger

Exercises

Exercises

  1. 1.

    What characterizes a negotiation situation?

  2. 2.

    What organizational constellations for negotiations in the industrial plant and project business are you aware of? What characterizes these constellations?

  3. 3.

    What characterizes negotiations in the industrial plant and project business?

  4. 4.

    Explain Raiffa’s (1982) zone of possible agreement model!

  5. 5.

    What sources of integrative potential in negotiations are you aware of?

  6. 6.

    What distinguishes the subjective value of a negotiation according to Curhan et al. (2006)?

  7. 7.

    Explain the process behind the formation of satisfaction with a negotiation!

  8. 8.

    What does the BATNA refer to and what impact does it have on a negotiation?

  9. 9.

    How important is the factor of time in negotiations?

  10. 10.

    What influence does the negotiator’s personal context have on a negotiation?

  11. 11.

    Describe the process of Framing in negotiations and discuss which frames are used!

  12. 12.

    Explain why a high initial offer can have the effect of a cognitive anchor and shift the outcome of the negotiation in favor of the party who submits the initial offer!

  13. 13.

    What characterizes integrative and distributive negotiating behavior?

  14. 14.

    What points should a conscientious preparation for a negotiation include?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Geiger, I. (2016). Negotiation Management. In: Kleinaltenkamp, M., Plinke, W., Geiger, I. (eds) Business Project Management and Marketing. Springer Texts in Business and Economics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48507-1_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation