Skip to main content
Log in

The Dynamics of Negotiation in a Global Inter-Organizational Network: Findings from the Air Transport and Travel Industry

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Networks of interdependent organizations, also known as network-based businesses, are being shaped by many forces. In supporting negotiations between the airlines and travel agencies locked in a principle/agent relationship wrought with tension, this paper uncovers the dynamics of negotiating in a global inter-organizational network. It provides guidelines for supporting such negotiations. Networks, as a form of interorganizational co-ordination, are becoming increasingly predominant. Knowledge on how to facilitate negotiations in global inter-organizational networks will become more valuable.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackermann, F., and C. Eden. (2001). “Contrasting Single User and Networked Group Decision Support Systems for Strategy Making,” Group Decision and Negotiation 10(1), 47-66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackermann, F., and C. Eden. (1996). “Contrasting GDSSs and GSSs in the Context of Strategic Change; Implications for Facilitation,” Journal of Decision Systems 6(3), 221-250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, D. F., and G. P. Richardson. (1997). “Scripts for Group Model Building,” System Dynamics Review 13(2), 107-130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemons, E. K. (1986). “Information Systems for Sustainable Competitive Advantage,” Information and Management 11(3), 131-136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, K. P., and R. Dye. (1998). “Competitive Dynamics of network-based Businesses,” Harvard Business Review.

  • Dean, D. L., R. E. Orwig, J. D. Lee, and D. R. Vogel. (1994). “Modeling with a Group Modeling Tool: Group Support, Model Quality, and Validation,” Proceedings of the 27th Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, volume IV, 214-223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, D. L., J. D. Lee, R. E. Orwig, and D. R. Vogel. (1995). “Technological Support for Group Process Modeling,” Journal of Management Information Systems 11(3), 43-64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., K. T. Craig, D. R. Vogel, and J. F. Nunamaker, Jr. (1997). “Group Support Systems for Strategic Planning,” Journal of Management Information Systems 14(1), 155-184.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vreede, G. J., and H. de Bruijn. (1999). “Exploring the Boundaries of Successful GSS Application: Supporting Inter-Organizational Policy Networks,” Database for Advances in Information Systems 30(3/4), 111-131.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vreede, G. J. (1997-1998). “Collaborative Support for Design: Animated Electronic Meetings,” Journal of Management Information Systems 14(3), 141-164.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vreede, G. J., and G. W. Dickson. (2000). “Using GSS to Support Designing Organizational Processes and Information Systems: An Action Research Study on Collaborative Business Engineering,” Group Decision and Negotiation 9(2), 161-183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, G. W., M. Limayem, J. E. L. Partridge, and G. DeSanctis. (1996). “Facilitating Computer Supported Meetings: A Cumulative Analysis In A Multiple Criteria Task Environment,” Group Decision and Negotiation 5(1), 51-72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J., and H. Singh. (1998). “The Relational View: Co-Operative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage,” Academy of Management Review 23(4), 660-679.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (1992). “On the Nature of Cognitive Maps,” Journal of Management Studies 29, 309-324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (1992). “Strategy Development as a Social Process”, Journal of Management Studies 29, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geyskens, I., N. Kumar, J. B. E. M. Steenkamp. (1995). Generalizations About Trust in Marketing Channel Relationships Using Meta-Analysis, working Paper: Catholic University of Leuven, Department of Applied Economics.

  • Jelassi, M., and A. Foroughi. (1989). “Negotiation Support Systems: An Overview of Design Issues and Existing Software,” Decision Support Systems (2), 167-182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konsynski, B. R., and F. W. McFarlan. (1990). “Information Partnerships — Shared Data, Shared Scale,” Harvard Business Review September-October, 114-120.

  • Kumar, N., J. D. Hibbard, and L. W. Stern. (1995). The Nature and Consequences of Marketing Channel Intermediary Commitment, working paper: report No. 94–115. Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D. C. (1992). “Modelling as Learning: A Consultancy Methodology for Enhancing Learning in Management Teams,” European Journal of Operations Research 59, 64-84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin. K. (1958). Resolving Social Conflicts. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Limayem, M., J. L. Partridge, G. Dickson, and G. DeSanctis. (1993). “Enhancing GDSS Effectiveness: Automated versus Human Facilitation,” Proceedings of the 26th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen, K., P. Maaranen, and J. Knuuttilla. (1994). “Groups Are not Always the Same: an Analysis of Group Behaviors in Electronic Meeting Systems,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 2, 261-284.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, G. M., and B. Campbell. (2001). “Implementing Recommendations as a Result of a System Dynamics Intervention.” Proceedings of the 34 th of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE Computer Society Press.

  • Miles, R. E., and C.C. Snow. (1992). “Causes of Failure in Network Organizations,” California Management Review (Summer), 53-72.

  • Mingers, J., and A. Gill. (1997). Multimethodology: The Theory and Practice of Combining Management Science Methodologies. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niederman, F., C. M. Beise, and P. M. Beranek. (1996). “Issues and Concerns About Computer-supported Meetings: The Facilitators Perspective,” MISQ 20(1), 1-22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, B. (2000). “Institutions and Forms of Co-ordination in Innovation Systems,” Organization Studies 21(5), 915-939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, B. (1992). “Towards a Dynamic Theory of Transactions,” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 2, 985-1010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, J., R. Grohowski, C. McGoff, D. Vogel, and B. Martz. (1990). “Implementing Electronic Meeting Systems at IBM: Lessons Learned,” MIS Quarterly.

  • Nunamaker, J., R. O. Briggs, D. D. Mittleman, and P. A. Balthazard. (1996/97). “Lessons From a Dozen Years of Group Support Systems Research: A Discussion of Lab and Field Findings,” Journal of Management Information Systems 13(3), 163-207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W. (1991). “Expanding the Scope of Institutional Analysis,” in The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 183-203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qureshi, S., I. Bogenrieder, and K. Kumar. (2000). “Managing Participative Diversity in Virtual teams: Requirements for Collaborative Technology Support,” Proceedings of the Thirty Third Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE Computer Society Press.

  • Qureshi, S. (2000). “Organizational Change through Collaborative Learning in a Network Form,” Group Decision and Negotiation 9(2), 129-147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schepers, W. (1991). “Group Decision Support Systems: an Inquiry into Theoretical and Philosophical Issues,” Doctoral Dissertation, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutz, A. et al. (1962-1996). Collected Papers. The Hague: Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sydow, J. (1998). “Understanding the Constitution of Interorganizational Trust,” in Trust Within and Between Organizations. New York: Oxford University Press, 31-64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vennix, J. A. M. (1998). Group Model Building: Facilitating Team Learning Using System Dynamics, 2nd Ed. Chicester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. R., R. E. Orwig, D. L. Dean, J. D. Lee, and C. Arthur. (1993). “Reengineering with Enterprise Analyzer,” Proceedings of the 26th Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 127-136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in Organisations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R., G. DeSanctis, and M. Poole. (1988). “Using a GDSS to Facilitate Group Consensus: Some Intended and Unintended Consequences,” MIS Quarterly 12(3), 463-477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism; Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolstenholme, E. (1992). “The Definition and Application of a Stepwise Approach to Model Conceptualisation and Analysis,” European Journal of Operations Research 59, 123-136.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Appelman, J., Rouwette, E. & Qureshi, S. The Dynamics of Negotiation in a Global Inter-Organizational Network: Findings from the Air Transport and Travel Industry. Group Decision and Negotiation 11, 145–164 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015277828385

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015277828385

Navigation