Advertisement

Negotiation Game for Improving Decision Making in Self-managing Teams

  • M. Birna van Riemsdijk
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
  • Thomas Rens
  • Zhiyong Wang
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 431)

Abstract

This paper presents a game intended to train teams that have both individual and teams goals to negotiate collaboratively in order to reach the team goal in the best way possible. We consider self-managing teams, i.e., teams that do not have a hierarchical structure. The importance of the team goal in comparison to their individual goals is touched upon, as are various conflicts that can occur during such a negotiation. The game, which is implemented in the Blocks World 4 Teams environment, gives a team a specific scenario and allows them to negotiate a plan of action. This plan of action is then performed by agents, after which the team members will be debriefed on their performance.

Keywords

Team Member Individual Goal Park Manager Group Goal Improve Decision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Briot, J.-P., Sordoni, A., Vasconcelos, E., de Azevedo Irving, M., Melo, G., Sebba-Patto, V., Alvarez, I.: Design of a Decision Maker Agent for a Distributed Role Playing Game – Experience of the SimParc Project. In: Dignum, F., Bradshaw, J., Silverman, B., van Doesburg, W. (eds.) Agents for Games and Simulations. LNCS, vol. 5920, pp. 119–134. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carnevale, P.J., Pruitt, D.G.: Negotiation and mediation. Annual Review of Psychology 43, 531–582 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crump, L.: Multiparty negotiation: what is it? ADR Bulletin 8(7) (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hindriks, K.V., Jonker, C.M., Kraus, S., Lin, R., Tykhonov, D.: Genius: negotiation environment for heterogeneous agents. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 1397–1398 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson, M., Jonker, C., van Riemsdijk, B., Feltovich, P.J., Bradshaw, J.M.: Joint Activity Testbed: Blocks World for Teams (BW4T). In: Aldewereld, H., Dignum, V., Picard, G. (eds.) ESAW 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5881, pp. 254–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moura, A.V.: Cooperative behavior strategies in colored trails. Master’s thesis. Department of Computer Science, Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachussets (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Santen, W., Jonker, C.M., Wijngaards, N.: Crisis decision making through a shared integrative negotiation mental model. International Journal of Emergency Management 6, 342–355 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Birna van Riemsdijk
    • 1
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
    • 1
  • Thomas Rens
    • 1
  • Zhiyong Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations