Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Drama Theory in Negotiation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

Part of the book series: Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation ((AGDN,volume 4))

Abstract

This chapter is concerned with the strategic conversations that take place between parties whose individual actions are of mutual concern as they seek collective solutions to shared problems. It shows how Drama Theory can be used as an analytical framework for modelling such strategic collaborations and conflicts: Conflict Analysis offers an alternative approach. The core concept is that of dilemma management, an emotional-logical process whereby people seek to escape from the pressures they inevitably encounter in working with others. The chapter traces the historical development of the approach and demonstrates its application through a number of illustrative examples to the point where an interested reader might attempt an informal analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bain H, Howard N, Saaty T (1971) Using the analysis of options technique to analyse a community conflict. J Conf Resolut 15(2):133–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG (1995) Modelling decisions in international relations: game theory and beyond. Mershon Rev Int Stud 39:19–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG (1996) Games and Drama: rationality and emotion. Mershon Rev Int Stud 40:171–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett P, Cropper S, Huxham C (1989) Modelling interactive decisions: the hypergame focus. In: Rosenhead J (ed) Rational analysis for a problematic world. Wiley, Chichester, pp 283–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett P, Howard N (1996) Rationality, emotion and preference change: drama-theoretic models of choice. Eur J Oper Res 92:603–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG, Tait A, MacDonagh K (1994) INTERACT: developing software for interactive decisions. Group Decis Negotiation 3:351–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binmore K (2006) Making decisions in large worlds. Marseille: ADRES Conference. Available via http://www.carloalberto.org/files/binmore.pdf. Accessed 29 April 2010

  • Brams SJ (1994) The theory of moves. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant J (1997) The plot thickens: understanding interaction through the metaphor of drama. Omega 25:255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant J (2002) Confrontations in health service management: insights from drama theory. Eur J Oper Res 142:610–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant J (2003) The six dilemmas of collaboration: inter-organisational relationships as drama. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp 55–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant J (2007) Drama theory: dispelling the myths. J Oper Res Soc 58:602–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant JW, Darwin J (2003) Immersive drama: testing health systems. Omega 31:127–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant JW, Darwin J (2004) Exploring inter-organisational relationships in the health service: an immersive drama approach. Eur J Oper Res 152:655–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant J, Howard N (2007) Achieving strategy coherence. In: O’Brien FA, Dyson RG (eds) Supporting strategy: frameworks, methods and models. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp 55–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambridge Foresight (1999) Learning through group simulation. Cambridge Foresight, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell J (1987) Cheap talk, coordination and entry. RAND J Econ 18(1):34–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R, Ury W (1982) Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. Hutchinson, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank RH (1988) Passions within reason: the strategic role of the emotions. Norton, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser N, Hipel KW (1984) Conflict analysis: models and resolutions. North-Holland, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi JC (1974a) Review of paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour by N. Howard. Am Pol Sci Rev 67:599–600

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi JC (1974b) Communication. Am Pol Sci Rev 68:730–731

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi JC (1974c) Communication. Am Pol Sci Rev 68:1694–1695

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1966) The theory of meta-games. Gen Syst Yearbook Soc Gen Syst Res 11(5):167–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of Rationality: theory of metagames and political behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1974a) Communication. Am Pol Sci Rev 68:729–730

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1974b) Communication. Am Pol Sci Rev 68:1692–1693

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1986) Usefulness of metagame analysis. J Oper Res Soc 37:430–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1987) The present and future of metagame analysis. Eur J Oper Res 32:1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1989) The manager as politician and general: the metagame approach to analysing cooperation and conflict, and The CONAN play. In: Rosenhead J (ed) Rational analysis for a problematic world. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp 239–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1990) ‘Soft’ game theory. Inf Decis Technol 16(3):215–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1993) The role of emotions in multi-organizational decision-making. J Oper Res Soc 44:613–623

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1994) Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 1: Dramatic resolution vs. rational solution & Part 2: Formal model of the resolution process. Group Decis Negotiation 3:187–206, 207–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1996) Negotiation as drama: how ‘games’ become dramatic. Int Negotiation 1:125–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1998) n-person ‘soft’ games. J Oper Res Soc 49:144–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1999) Confrontation analysis: how to win operations other than war. Department of Defense, CCRP Publications, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (2001) The M&A play: using drama theory for mergers and acquisitions. In: Rosenhead J, Mingers J (eds) Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. Wiley, Chichester, pp 249–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (2004) Contingent, time-dependent conflict resolution: drama theory in the extensive form. In: Bryant JW (ed) Analysing conflict and its resolution. Proceedings of a conference of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications. IMA, Southend-on-Sea, UK, p 173

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (2008) Drama theory as a theory of pre-game communication and equilibrium selection. Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N, Bennett PG, Bryant JW, Bradley M (1992/1993). Manifesto for a theory of drama and irrational choice. J Oper Res Soc 44:99–103 and Syst Pract 6:429–434

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N, Murray-Jones P (2002) Transformations at a drama-theoretic ‘moment of truth’. Defence Evaluation & Research Agency, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Idea Sciences (2005) Confrontation manager user manual. Idea Sciences, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson G, Scholes K, Whittington R (2005) Exploring corporate strategy: text and cases, 7th edn. FT Prentice-Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Hipel KW, Fang L (1987) The graph model for conflicts. Automatica 23(1):41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz DS (1974) Review of paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour by N Howard. Technometrics 15:652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray-Jones P, Howard N (2001) Co-ordinated positions in a drama-theoretic confrontation: mathematical foundations for a PO decision support system. Defence Evaluation & Research Agency, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray-Jones P, Stubbs L, Howard N (2002) Confrontation and collaboration analysis: experimental and mathematical results. CCRTS Symposium 2002. Available from http://www.dodccrp.org. Accessed 29 April 2010

  • Obeidi A, Hipel KW (2005) Strategic and dilemma analyses of a water export conflict. INFOR 43:247–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport A (1970) Editorial: games. J Confl Resolut 14:177–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhead J (1989) (ed) Rational analysis for a problematic world. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage L (1951) The foundations of statistics. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik M (1970) Game theory, behaviour, and the paradox of the prisoner’s dilemma: three solutions. J Confl Resolut 14:181–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stubbs L, Howard N, Tait A (1999) How to model a confrontation – computer support for drama theory. In: Proceedings of 1999 command and control research and technology symposium, Naval War College, Newport, RI, 29 June–1 July 1999

    Google Scholar 

  • Tait A (2006) Speed confrontation management. Available via http://www.ideasciences.com. Accessed 29 April 2010

  • Thrall RM (1974) Review of paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour by N. Howard. Oper Res 22:669–671

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sheffield Business School, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, S1 1WB, UK

    Jim Bryant

Authors
  1. Jim Bryant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jim Bryant .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Mathematics, Wilfrid Laurier University, University Ave. W. 75, Waterloo, N2L 3C5, Canada

    D. Marc Kilgour

  2. Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, G4 0QU, United Kingdom

    Colin Eden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bryant, J. (2010). The Role of Drama Theory in Negotiation. In: Kilgour, D., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9097-3_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation