Building Business Relationships with Negotiation
Successful negotiators prepare by determining their position along five dimensions. We introduce a negotiation model based on these dimensions and on two primitive concepts: intimacy (degree of closeness) and balance (degree of fairness). The intimacy is a pair of matrices that evaluate both an agent’s contribution to the relationship and its opponent’s contribution each from an information view and from a utilitarian view. The balance is the difference between these matrices. A relationship strategy maintains a target intimacy for each relationship that an agent would like the relationship to move towards in future. The negotiation strategy maintains a set of Options that are in-line with the current intimacy level, and then tactics wrap the Options in argumentation with the aim of attaining a successful deal and manipulating the successive negotiation balances towards the target intimacy.
KeywordsMulti Agent System Multiagent System Autonomous Agent Logic Framework Negotiation Strategy
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Adams, J.S.: Inequity in social exchange. In: Berkowitz, L. (ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 2, Academic Press, New York (1965)Google Scholar
- 2.Sondak, H., Neale, M.A., Pinkley, R.: The negotiated allocations of benefits and burdens: The impact of outcome valence, contribution, and relationship. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 249–260 (1995)Google Scholar
- 3.Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M., Minton, J.W.: Essentials of Negotiation. McGraw Hill, New York (2001)Google Scholar
- 4.Sierra, C., Debenham, J.: Information-based agency. In: Proceedings of Twentieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence IJCAI- 2007, Hyderabad, India, pp. 1513–1518 (2007)Google Scholar
- 6.Fischer, R., Ury, W., Patton, B.: Getting to Yes: Negotiating agreements without giving in. Penguin Books (1995)Google Scholar
- 7.Valley, K.L., Neale, M.A., Mannix, E.A.: Friends, lovers, colleagues, strangers: The effects of relationships on the process and outcome of negotiations. In: Bies, R., Lewicki, R., Sheppard, B. (eds.) Research in Negotiation in Organizations, vol. 5, pp. 65–94. JAI Press, Greenwich (1995)Google Scholar
- 8.Arcos, J.L., Esteva, M., Noriega, P., Rodríguez, J.A., Sierra, C.: Environment engineering for multiagent systems. Journal on Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 18 (2005)Google Scholar
- 9.Debenham, J.: Bargaining with information. In: Jennings, N., Sierra, C., Sonenberg, L., Tambe, M. (eds.) Proceedings Third International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems AAMAS-2004, pp. 664–671. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
- 10.Sierra, C., Debenham, J.: An information-based model for trust. In: Dignum, F., Dignum, V., Koenig, S., Kraus, S., Singh, M., Wooldridge, M. (eds.) Proceedings Fourth International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems AAMAS-2005, Utrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 497–504. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar