Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (13)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Part of Periodical (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (19)
Keywords
- Negotiation performance (2)
- Automotive industry (1)
- Business negotiation (1)
- Buyer–seller negotiations (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Chatbot (1)
- Consumer brand equity (1)
- Crisis management (1)
- Dialogsystem (1)
- Future scenarios (1)
Purpose - This study aims to investigate whether a team of females negotiates differently than a team of males, and whether (workplace) friendship moderates the relationship between single-gender team composition and negotiation outcomes. Design/methodology/approach - The authors used two laboratory studies and paired 216 MBA students into single-gender teams of friends and non-friends, and then engaged them in several dyadic multi-issue negotiations. Findings - The results show that on average, male teams of non-friends reached significantly better outcomes than female teams of non-friends. However, and interestingly, female teams of friends perform equally to male teams of friends. Research limitations/implications - The authors contribute both to the negotiations and the workplace friendship literature because very little research has examined negotiation among friends at work and in particular team negotiations. In addition, the authors also contribute to the literature on gender differences in negotiations because existing research has rarely examined the differences between all-male and all-female teams and especially the relationship between same-sex teams and their effects on negotiation outcomes. Practical implications - This research has clear implications to managers with regard to team composition. Specifically, a winning all-female team should not be changed! Originality/value - This is the first study to examine the relationship between workplace friendship, gender and negotiation outcomes.
Purpose:
While industrial marketers have long bundled their products and services to sell them as packages, to what extent should negotiators also rely on packaging their offers? Clearly, negotiating at a package level can tax the cognitive capacity of the involved parties at some point. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the impact of the number and type of issues that should be negotiated simultaneously to leverage the package strategy efficiently and effectively in multi-issue buyer-seller negotiations.
Design/methodology/approach:
The authors conducted and analyzed negotiation simulations with 676 students from 2 public universities.
Findings:
The authors’ results suggest that negotiating three out of six issues simultaneously is the least efficient but most effective strategy in multi-issue buyer-seller negotiations. Moreover, they found that bundling distributive and integrative issues is more efficient and effective than only bundling distributive or integrative negotiation issues in a package offer.
Originality/value:
Past research has examined the impact of negotiating a package as compared to each issue separately; however, little empirical attention has been directed toward understanding how to apply a package strategy in complex multi-issue negotiations.
Findings - The results provide (longitudinal) support for the proposed evaluative approach. They reveal new evidence that building brand equity is a means to mitigate negative effects, and indicate that negative spillover effects within a high-equity brand portfolio are unlikely. Finally, this research identifies situations in which developing a new brand might be more beneficial than leveraging an existing brand. Practical implications - This research has significant implications for firms with high-equity brands that might be affected by a scandal. The findings support managers to navigate their brands through a crisis.
Researchers have shown that structuring issues and organizing an agenda before a negotiation lead to improved negotiation performance. By using issue analysis, negotiators become aware of their own and their opponents' preferences on negotiation issues and are able to use this knowledge to optimize their degree of success. Following research on asymmetrical preferences in negotiations, we introduce a new approach for issue analysis that considers the identification of one-sided preferences, specifically a 0-preference for issues from one party. We conducted an experimental study to test if this type of preference for an issue (chance issue) yields strategic potential for a negotiator. We also examined whether the identification of these chance issues could be particularly relevant for a low-power party in negotiations with a power imbalance, to overcome the lower scope of action due to the weaker negotiating position. The results indicate initial verification that no preference at all for one issue could lead to higher individual performance and noneconomic outcomes. Joint performance was positively affected by 0-preference, even in unbalanced power situations.
Megatrends, affecting multiple aspects of future society, economy, and technology, drive today's business world. They are expected to impact all areas in companies and will, therefore, most likely occur in business negotiations. Although several studies address future developments of different business divisions, the megatrends' impact on negotiations has, thus far, not been analyzed. We designed a model including the three megatrends, i.e., globalization and economic shift, digitalization and new technologies, and demographic and social change, which have main effects on specific negotiation aspects. Our study combined an online survey and expert interviews with negotiation practitioners to provide a first broad view of how megatrends affect future business negotiations. The results confirm our model and reveal a close connection of megatrends and single negotiation aspects. Among others, we examine an orientation toward global partners, an increased interconnection through various electronic systems, as well as two opposite relationship directions - long-term and integrative through strategic cooperation vs. short-term and distributive through competition and new technologies.
Time for change?
(2022)
Purpose:
This study aims to provide probable future developments in the form of holistic scenarios for business negotiations. In recent years, negotiation research did not put a lot of emphasis on external changes. Consequently, current challenges and trends are scarcely integrated, making it difficult to support negotiation practice perspectively.
Design/methodology/approach:
This paper applies the structured, multi-method approach of scenario analysis. To examine the future space of negotiations, this combines qualitative and quantitative measures to base our analysis on negotiation experts’ assessments, estimations and visions of the negotiation future.
Findings:
The results comprise an overview of five negotiation scenarios in the year 2030 and of their individual drivers. The five revealed scenarios are: digital intelligence, business as usual, powerful network – the route to collaboration, powerful network – the route to predominance and system crash.
Originality/value:
The scenario analysis is a suitable approach that enables to relate various factors of the negotiation environment to negotiations themselves and allows an examination of future changes in buyer–seller negotiations and the creation of possible future scenarios. The identified scenarios provide an orientation for business decisions in the field of negotiation.
Wie verhandelt die Praxis?
(2015)