1988
DOI: 10.1111/j.1571-9979.1988.tb00453.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Janus Quality of Negotiation: Dealmaking and Dispute Settlement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1988
1988
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Negotiation is an interpersonal interaction through which two or more parties with perceived incompatible goals attempt to resolve their differences (Putnam & Roloff, 1992). Although the vast majority of negotiation research is focused on deal-making situations where a deal or a new relationship is about to be created (Sander & Rubin, 1988), in reality individuals are frequently pulled into disputes with someone in an already existing relationship. While negotiation research tends to portray negotiators as rational decision-makers who strategically plan their moves and turns around monetary or economic goals, communicative exchange between disputants can be driven primarily by negotiators’ socioemotional goals; such emotion-laden interaction can have a make-it-or-break-it impact on the relationship between dispute parties.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Negotiation is an interpersonal interaction through which two or more parties with perceived incompatible goals attempt to resolve their differences (Putnam & Roloff, 1992). Although the vast majority of negotiation research is focused on deal-making situations where a deal or a new relationship is about to be created (Sander & Rubin, 1988), in reality individuals are frequently pulled into disputes with someone in an already existing relationship. While negotiation research tends to portray negotiators as rational decision-makers who strategically plan their moves and turns around monetary or economic goals, communicative exchange between disputants can be driven primarily by negotiators’ socioemotional goals; such emotion-laden interaction can have a make-it-or-break-it impact on the relationship between dispute parties.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%