This article explores negotiation linkage dynamics (how one negotiation influences or determines the process or outcome of another) by examining three bilateral trade treaty negotiations conducted by the governKey words: negotiation analysis, negotiation linkage, temporal frameworks, trade policy, trade talks. The Linkages in the Negotiation ChainAt a minimum, successful negotiation analysis requires an understanding of the parties, their goals, and the structural relationships between their goals. This knowledge is essential for identifying both the interdependence Larry Crump is senior lecturer of international management in the department of international business and a member
Complex negotiations have been conducted for a long time, although until somewhat recently analysts had yet to conceptualize their fundamental nature, their essential elements, and the relationship between these elements. Over the past forty years, however, scholars have gained increasing understanding of the forces that shape negotiation complexity. In this article, I first review literature that has explored complex negotiations, which is found primarily in negotiation studies, and studies of international negotiation. I then develop a five‐part theoretical framework for analyzing complex negotiations: (1) identification of negotiation architecture, (2) context analysis, (3) process analysis, (4) structural and relational analysis, and (5) decisional analysis. I then demonstrate the utility of this five‐part framework by examining the U.S.–Australia Free Trade negotiations that produced the Australia–U.S. Free Trade Agreement of 2005. Finally, the article closes with some observations on complex negotiations and their analysis.
Negotiation linkage (the way in which one negotiation influences the process or outcome of another) presents challenges that are complex and real. Based on field research, this qualitative study examines four linked‐bilateral trade treaty negotiations conducted by Australia, Chile, the European Union, Singapore, and the United States to establish theoretical understanding about the strategic management of negotiation linkage dynamics. Several outcomes are achieved through case analysis. This study (a) introduces “degree of linkage dynamics” (robust, moderate, or modest) as a concept and concludes that it is determined by structural and contextual factors, (b) develops a framework of linked party action, (c) establishes guidance for managing opportunistic behavior in linked negotiations, (d) builds a six‐part typology of strategic techniques that can produce tangible gains in linked negotiations, and (e) examines research opportunities to further extend negotiation linkage theory. Research methodology developed in this study serves as a model for investigating negotiation linkage dynamics.
This 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.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.