A Classification of Bargaining Steps and their Impact on Negotiation Outcomes

Abstract

In this paper, we develop a typology of bargaining steps for multi-issue negotiations, which is derived from possible changes in single issues. By considering all combinations of such changes, we create a consistent classification of steps. This classification forms the basis of an empirical analysis of the impact of different types of bargaining steps on various outcome dimensions of negotiations. We perform an exploratory analysis based on an ex-post analysis of existing negotiation data, which was collected over several years using an Internet-based negotiation support system. Empirical results indicate a strong positive impact of log-rolling strategies and a negative impact of "hard" tactics like insistence on the chances of reaching an agreement. Contrary to expectations, hard tactics do not improve the efficiency of agreements.

An Analytical Approach to Offer Generation in Concession-Based Negotiation Processes

“…Thus, the own utility the opponent lost with his last offer compared to his penultimate offer should be returned by the negotiator by proposing an offer with a utility level that compared to the last offer of the negotiator offsets the opponent's utility loss. The approach is comparable to the modified tit-for-tat strategy recently proposed for software agents in automated negotiations (Shakun 2005;Filzmoser 2010). We therefore define the requirement of reciprocity via the comparison of the utility given up by the opponent in his or her last step, in relation to the utility the opponent gains from the current step of the focal negotiator.…”

Negotiators’ Effectiveness with Mixed Agendas: An Empirical Exploration of Tasks, Decisions and Performance Criteria

“…As in Filzmoser and Vetschera's (2008) study, these negotiations were not conducted under strictly controlled experimental conditions, but the volume of data, as they noted, partially offsets that drawback. There is a longstanding tradition of research based on negotiation role-plays conducted in the context of a course.…”

“…I chose this approach because it: (a) represents a vantage point or frame that negotiators can assume on every agenda item (e.g., "my best" solution, "my worst" solution); (b) offers a characterization of different types of decisions (cf. Filzmoser and Vetschera 2008); and (c) provides a common scale that facilitates factor analysis and comparison of decisions across agenda items and negotiator roles. For every item, the agreed-upon solution was recoded from 1 (least beneficial) to 5 (most beneficial) depending on the negotiator's role.…”

Concessions Dynamics in Electronic Negotiations: A Cross-Lagged Regression Analysis

“…At the most disaggregate level, one can consider individual issues. This kind of analysis allows to distinguish different types of bargaining steps (Filzmoser and Vetschera 2008), the impact of preferences on negotiator behavior concerning individual issues (Vetschera 2007), or the amounts of concessions negotiators make in different issues and their impact on negotiation success .…”

“…By moving from one offer to the next, parties might change their positions concerning each issue. These changes can be categorized into different bargaining steps (Gimpel 2007;Filzmoser and Vetschera 2008), among which concessions, i.e. bargaining steps in which a negotiator gives in with respect to a least one issue, are the most common and important ones.…”