Abstract
This article introduces network analysis as a supplement to current research on the process of negotiations. We briefly review the literature on negotiations involving third parties, and argue that to understand fully the dynamics of dispute resolution, it is important to examine processes in addition to outcomes. We propose social network methods as a way to examine systematically the step-by-step process through which self-interested third parties influence negotiated outcomes. To illustrate, we analyze process data from triads in an agent-assisted negotiation. We describe three classes of results. First, we describe the basic properties of the third-party-assisted negotiation process (e.g., we found agents to be the most active players in the negotiation process—they initiate interactions significantly more frequently than buyers or sellers). Second, we study the changes in the process characteristics due to experimental conditions (i.e., we found the interactive patterns to vary depending on the information made available to the third party). Finally, we examine the relationships between the systematic process measures and standard outcome measures. We argue that these measures are complementary, and that the process should be informative with respect to interpreting, predicting, and managing outcomes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ArrowK.J.: 1985, “Agency Costs Versus Fiduciary Duties”, in Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business (eds. J.H.W.Pratt and R.J.Zeckhauser), Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
BarleyS.R.: 1991, “Contextualizing Conflict: Notes on the Anthropology of Dispute and Negotiation”, in Handbook of Research in Negotiation, vol. 3 (eds. M.H.Bazerman, R.Lewicki, and B.Sheppard), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Bazerman, M.H., Neale, M.A., Valley, K.L., Zajac, E. and Kim, Y.M.: 1992, “The Impact of Agents and Mediators on Negotiation Outcomes”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, (in press).
BerkowitzS.D.: 1982, An Introduction to Structural Analysis, Butterworths, Toronto.
BonacichP.: 1987, “Communications Networks and Collective Action”, Social Networks 9, 389–396.
Burt, R.S.: 1990, “Markets, Firms, and Structural Holes”, Paper presented at the Conference on Networks and Organizations, Harvard Business School.
CarnevaleP.J.: 1986, “Strategic Choice in Mediation”, Negotiation Journal 2, 41–56.
GalaskiewiczJ.: 1985, Social Organization of an Urban Grants Economy, Academic Press, New York.
GalaskiewiczJ. and KrohnK.R.: 1984, “Positions, Roles, and Dependencies in a Community Interorganizational System”, Sociological Quarterly 25, 527–550.
GottmanJ.M. and BakemanR.: 1979, “The Sequential Analysis of Observational Data”, in pp. 185–206, Social Interaction Analysis: Methdological Issues (eds. M.E.Lamb, S.J.Suomi, and G.R.Stephenson), University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
GouldR.V. and FernandezR.M.: 1989, “Structures of Mediation: A Formal Approach to Brokerage in Transaction Networks”, in pp. 89–129, Sociological Methodology (ed. C.C.Clogg), Blackwell, Oxford.
GulliverP.H.: 1977, “On Mediators”, in Social Anthropology and Law (ed. J.Hammett), Academic Press, New York.
HiltropJ.: 1985, “Mediator Behavior and the Settlement of Collective Bargaining Disputes in Britain”, Journal of Social Issues 41, 83–104.
IacobucciD. and WassermanS.: 1987, “Dyadic Social Interaction”, Psychological Bulletin 102, 293–306.
IacobucciD. and WassermanS.: 1988, “A General Framework for the Statistical Analysis of Sequential Dyadic Interaction Data”, Psychological Bulletin 103, 379–390.
KeithJ.E., JacksonD.W.Jr. and CrosbyL.A.: 1990, “Effects of Alternative Types of Influence Strategies Under Different Channel Dependence Structures”, Journal of Marketing 54, 30–41.
KennyDavid and JuddC.M.: 1986, “Consequences of Violating the Independence Assumption in Analysis of Variance”, Psychological Bulletin 99, 422–431.
KennyD. and LaVoieL.: 1985, “Separating Individual and Group Effects”, Journal of Psychology and Social Psychology 48, 339–348.
KnokeD. and KuklinskiJ.: 1982, Network Analysis, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
KolbD.M.: 1983, The Mediators, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
KolbD.M. and RubinJ.Z.: 1991, “Mediation Through a Disciplinary Prism”, in Handbook of Negotiation Research: Research in Negotiation in Organizations, Vol. III, (eds. M.Bazerman, R.Lewicki, and B.Sheppard), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
KresselK.: 1985, The Process of Divorce. How Professionals and Couples Negotiate Settlements, Basic Books, New York.
LindE.A. and TylerT.R.: 1988, The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Plenum Press, New York.
MarsdenP.V.: 1982, “Brokerage behavior in restricted exchange networks”, in pp. 201–218, Social Structure and Network Analysis (eds. P.V.Marsden and N.Lin), Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
MerryS.: 1982, “The Social Organization of Mediation in Nonindustrial Societies”, in Politics of Informal Justice (ed. R.Abel), Academic Press, New York.
NealeM.A., PinkleyR.L., BrittainJ. and NorthcraftG.B.: 1990, Managerial Third Party Dispute Intervention, Research Proposal, Fund for Research on Dispute Resolution, Washington, DC.
O'ReillyC.A.: 1983, “The Use of Information in Organizational Decision Making: A Model and Some Propositions”, Research in Organizational Behavior 5, 103–139.
PettigrewA.: 1972, “Information Control as a Power Resource”, Sociology 6, 187–204.
RaiffaH.: 1982, The Art and Science of Negotiation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
RubinJ.Z.: 1981, Dynamics of Third-Party Intervention: Kissinger in the Middle East. New York: Praeger.
RubinJ.Z. and SanderF.E.A.: 1988, “When Should We Use Agents: Direct vs. Representative Negotiation”, Negotiation Journal 4, 395–401.
SackettG.P.: 1979, “The Lag Sequential Analysis of Contingency and Cyclicity in Behavioral Interaction Research”, in pp. 623–649, Handbook of Infant Development (ed. J.Osofy), Wiley, New York.
SheppardB.H.: 1984, “Third-Party Conflict Intervention: A Procedural Framework”, Research in Organizational Behavior 6, 141–190.
ThibautJ. and WalkerL.: 1975, Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
UryW., BrettJ. and GoldbergS.: 1989, Designing Dispute Systems, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Valley, K., White, S., Neale, M. and Bazerman, M.: 1992, “The Effect of Agent's Knowledge on Negotiator Performance”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
WassermanS. and IacobucciD.: 1986, “Statistical Analysis of Discrete Relational Data”, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 39, 41–64.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by a grant from the Dispute Resolution Research Center.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Valley, K.L., White, S.B. & Iacobucci, D. The process of assisted negotiations: A network analysis. Group Decision and Negotiation 1, 117–135 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00406751
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00406751