Creativity and negotiation research: the integrative potential

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this article is to outline ways in which the large body of empirical work on creativity can meaningfully inform negotiation. In doing so, two general streams of creativity research and their implications for negotiation theory and empirical analysis are considered. Negotiation pundits advise that negotiators should engage in creative problem-solving to craft integrative agreements, and it is widely believed by both negotiation theorists and practitioners that "out-of-the-box" thinking and creative idea generation are necessary for win-win negotiation. Although practitioners have strongly encouraged parties to engage in creative problem-solving, there are remarkably few empirical investigations of creative thinking, brainstorming and other idea-generation methods in negotiation. Design/methodology/approach -First, creativity as a trait is considered and the relationship between individual differences in creativity and negotiation performance is examined. Then, creative thinking as a causal factor is examined and how it may influence the negotiation process and outcomes is suggested. Finally, three considerations for further integrating creativity and negotiation research are suggested: communication media, idea-generation strategies and morality and social motivation. Findings -A literature review revealed four studies that have empirically tested the influence of trait creativity on negotiation performance. Even less research has manipulated creative thinking or training to analyze creativity as a causal factor of negotiation outcomes. Originality/value -This research will benefit both creativity and negotiation scholars by suggesting the limited amount of work at their intersection yet the opportunities that exist for further research.

Culture and getting to yes : The linguistic signature of creative agreements in the United States and Egypt

“…As such, it highlights the distinct processes that lead to the creation of novel and useful agreements in contexts where people have both a motive to compete and a motive to cooperate with others (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2014). To date, there has been very little integration of the negotiation and the individual and team creativity literatures (see Kurtzberg, ; Schei, ; Wilson & Thompson, , for examples of notable exceptions), yet there are likely many promising synergies between them. Identifying the similarities and differences in the individual and contextual factors that foster versus inhibit creativity across different group tasks and across cultures is an exciting area for future research.…”

“…Like other creative decision‐making tasks that are the subject of this special issue, the best negotiated agreements are those that redefine the problem in novel ways (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2014) in order to create useful and sustainable solutions. Indeed, many have argued that creativity is a key ingredient in value creation in negotiations (e.g., Carnevale, ; Goldenberg, Nir, & Maoz, ; Kurtzberg, ; Miles & LaSalle, ; Schei, ; Wilson & Thompson, ). In The Art and Science of Negotiation , Raiffa () prescribes that negotiators should engage in “creative side‐by‐side joint problem solving” (p. 315), and Carnevale () explains that integrative agreements—which meet the needs of all parties—inherently involve creative thinking.…”

El liderazgo estratégico, la negociación y su influencia sobre la percepción del prestigio en pequeñas empresas

“…Asimismo, el líder empresario necesita de estrategias de negociación que lo lleven a realizar transacciones en beneficio de la organización. La estrategia de negociación ganar-ganar es uno de los factores del modelo de Harvard (Lewicki, Barry & Saunders, 2016) y es una de las dimensiones que contribuye al éxito de las pequeñas empresas (Kirk, Oettingen, & Gollwitzer, 2013;Metcalf, Bird, Peterson, Shankarmahesh, & Lituchy, 2007;Wilson & Thompson, 2014). Es decir, una estrategia de negociación integrativa (ganar-ganar) entre la pequeña empresa y los stakeholders o diversos públicos que intervienen en la organización influirá en el logró de los objetivos empresariales.…”

Theoretical Development: Specialism, Achievement, Coordination, (SAC) Model – Kantian Perspective

“…Structures which we determined would support robust theoretical interpretation for a pragmatic and determined sales research strategy were drawn from adaptation level theory (Tang, 2014), since this would be reflective of the internal reference which represents expectations in regard to a products value formation. Similarly, aspects of competing theories such as attitude model (Gupta, Melewar, & Bourlakis, 2010) and negotiation theory (Beaulieu, 1987;Bilodeau, 2003;Ruth Wilson & L. Thompson, 2014) clearly needed to be considered as fundamental to the onset framework. However, from the data collected, we would look to develop this into a new multi perspective model to scrutinise psychological processes involved in forming positive research expectations and/or impacts.…”