The effects of substantive task characteristics on negotiators' ability to reach efficient agreements

Milter, Richard G.; Darling, Thomas A.; Mumpower, Jeryl L.

doi:10.1016/0001-6918(96)00009-1

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…how people interpret and evaluate decisions. In the area of negotiations, Milter et al (1996) showed that the content of a negotiation affected the likelihood of logrolling and concession patterns. Thus, the conflict issue-what the conflict is about-is an important predictor of negotiation processes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Conflict Issues on Fixed-Pie Perceptions, Problem Solving, and Integrative Outcomes in Negotiation

Harinck

Dreu

Vianen

2000

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Conflict Issues on Fixed-Pie Perceptions, Problem Solving, and Integrative Outcomes in Negotiation

Harinck

Dreu

Vianen

2000

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Fourth, we employ an innovative methodological approach that allows us to investigate our research questions using data from approximately 50 years of negotiation research (353 studies from 289 articles for joint gains and 195 studies from 171 articles for impasse rates; see the Literature Search and Eligibility Coding section). Because we included studies using negotiation tasks with different settings (e.g., joint-venture negotiations, e.g., Beersma & De Dreu, 2003; job negotiations, e.g., Schaerer et al, 2018; buyer–seller negotiations; e.g., Bazerman et al, 1985), various numbers of issues (i.e., 2–11 issues, e.g., Kray et al, 2004; Milter et al, 1996), and diverse samples (e.g., undergraduates, MBA students, practitioners) from different cultural contexts (e.g., America, Europe, Asia; e.g., Brett & Okumura, 1998; Gelfand et al, 2013; Graham, 1993), our findings are more generalizable compared to findings derived from a single study using one type of task and sample. Finally, we seek to offer negotiation practitioners empirically validated advice regarding whether they should bring more issues to the bargaining table to expand the pie or reduce the number of issues to avoid spoiling the cake .…”

Section: Present Research: Overview and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the pie or spoiling the cake? How the number of negotiation issues affects integrative bargaining.

Warsitzka,

Zhang,

Beersma

et al. 2024

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research investigates how the number of issues affects the quality of outcomes in terms of joint gains and impasse rates in integrative negotiations. In the literature, two opposing positions exist reflecting a complexity dilemma regarding the number of negotiation issues: One position suggests that complex negotiations involving higher numbers of issues offer more trade-off opportunities, thereby providing negotiators with greater structural flexibility in reaching mutually beneficial agreements, which improves outcome quality. The opposite position emphasizes that the greater information load inherent in negotiating more issues impedes outcome quality. We propose a third, intermediate position: Negotiating more issues may only improve outcome quality up to a threshold, above which adding further issues results in deteriorated outcomes. We tested these propositions using a quasi-meta-analytic technique by examining the associations between the number of issues, joint gains, and impasse rates across multiple empirical studies on integrative negotiations using various negotiation tasks with different numbers of issues (N = 38,063/21,271 negotiations for joint gains/impasse rates). Moreover, we investigated whether factors related to how negotiators subjectively deal with the increased complexity associated with higher numbers of issues moderate the number-of-issues effect on joint gains. Multilevel analyses revealed no significant number-of-issues effect on joint gains up to a threshold of 3 issues but a negative effect for negotiations involving more than 3 issues. By contrast, we did not find a number-of-issues effect on impasse rates. Moreover, we did not obtain evidence for moderation effects. Findings are discussed with respect to their theoretical and practical implications.

show abstract

“…Log-rolling has been shown to be a very effective strategy for reaching efficient results, in analytical research (Mumpower 1991), as well as in empirical studies (Froman and Cohen 1970;Milter et al 1996). We therefore formulate the following hypotheses:…”

Section: Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Milter et al (1996) found that certain task characteristics are more likely to induce log-rolling behavior by negotiators than others, and that log-rolling improved outcomes of negotiations in terms of Pareto-optimality. However, in their study, log-rolling was measured only indirectly via the compromise on which negotiators agreed, not directly in the process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

A Classification of Bargaining Steps and their Impact on Negotiation Outcomes

Filzmoser

Vetschera

2008

Group Decis Negot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

The effects of substantive task characteristics on negotiators' ability to reach efficient agreements

Cited by 7 publications

References 11 publications

The Impact of Conflict Issues on Fixed-Pie Perceptions, Problem Solving, and Integrative Outcomes in Negotiation

The Impact of Conflict Issues on Fixed-Pie Perceptions, Problem Solving, and Integrative Outcomes in Negotiation

Expanding the pie or spoiling the cake? How the number of negotiation issues affects integrative bargaining.

A Classification of Bargaining Steps and their Impact on Negotiation Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About