Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe pp 497–514Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Public Sector Negotiations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Negotiation is ubiquitous in the public sector, from policy formation to budget allocation or the coordination of public–private partnerships. The focus on negotiations has nevertheless been somewhat limited in public administration research, but in neighboring disciplines such as behavioral economics and social psychology, negotiations have been studied extensively. This chapter aims at filling this gap.This chapter discusses negotiations by focusing on the individual negotiator. I focus on what a negotiation is and who negotiates in the public sector by discussing some substantive examples. Distributive and integrative negotiations are discerned and are accompanied by some public sector illustrations. Specific attention is given to public sector distinctiveness in context and its workers and its potential consequences for negotiations.

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

References

  • Alons, G., & Zwaan, P. (2016). New wine in different bottles: Negotiating and selling the CAP post-2013 reform. Sociologia Ruralis, 56, 349–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armingeon, K. (2002). The effects of negotiation democracy: A comparative analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 41, 81–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baarspul, H. C., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2011). Do employees behave differently in public-vs private-sector organizations? A state-of-the-art review. Public Management Review, 13, 967–1002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Yoav, O., & Pruitt, D. G. (1984). Accountability to constituents: A two-edged sword. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 283–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwman, R. B., Van Deemen, A. M. A., van Thiel, S., & Rouwette, E. A. J. A. (2016). Accountability and coalitions, evidence from a face-to-face negotiation experiment. In IRSPM Conference 2016 presentation, Hong Kong, China.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M. (2005). Public Accountability. In E. Ferlie, L. Lynn, & C. Pollitt (Eds.), The oxford handbook of public management (pp. 182–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M., Schillemans, T., & ’t Hart, P. (2008). Does public accountability work? An assessment tool. Public Administration, 86, 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2004). All organizations are public: Comparing public and private organizations. Washington, DC: Beard Books. http://www.beardbooks.com/beardbooks/all_organizations_are_public.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Kingsley, G. (1998). Risk culture in public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 58, 109–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brans, M., Pelgrims, C., & Hoet, D. (2006). Comparative observations on tensions between professional policy advice and political control in the Low Countries. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72, 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, G. A., & Brewer, G. A. (2011). Parsing public/private differences in work motivation and performance: An experimental study. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(Supplement 3), i347–i362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, G. A., & Selden, S. C. (1998). Whistle blowers in the federal civil service: New evidence of the public service ethic. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 413–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryer, T. A. (2006). Toward a relevant agenda for a responsive public administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 479–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. K. (1999). Trust expectations, information sharing, climate of trust, and negotiation effectiveness and efficiency. Group and Organization Management, 24, 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buurman, M., Delfgaauw, J., Dur, R., & Van den Bossche, S. (2012). Public sector employees: Risk averse and altruistic? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 83, 279–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmichael, F. (2005). A guide to game theory (1st ed.). Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, J. P. (2006). Creativity in the outcomes of conflict. In M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman, & E. C. Marcus (Ed.), Handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice, (2nd ed., pp. 414–435). San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. J., & Pruitt, D. G. (1992). Negotiation and mediation. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 531–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, S. (2004). Behind closed doors: Publicity, secrecy, and the quality of deliberation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12, 389–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Bruijn, H., & Dicke, W. (2006). Strategies for safeguarding public values in liberalized utility sectors. Public Administration, 84, 717–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Weingart, L. R., & Kwon, S. (2000). Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytic review and test of two theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Beersma, B., Stroebe, K., & Euwema, M. C. (2006). Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Beersma, B., Steinel, W., & Van Kleef, G.A. (2007). The psychology of negotiation: Principles and basic processes. In A. Kruglanski & T. E. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 608–629). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Graaf, G., & van der Wal, Z. (2010). Managing conflicting public values: Governing with integrity and effectiveness. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(6), 623–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimotakis, N., Conlon, D. E., & Ilies, R. (2012). The mind and heart (literally) of the negotiator: Personality and contextual determinants of experiential reactions and economic outcomes in negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Docherty, D., & Campbell, M. C. (2005). Agency: Teaching negotiators to analyze conflict structure and anticipate the consequences of principal-agent relationships. Marquette Law Review, 87, 655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, J. (2002). The budget-minimizing bureaucrat? Empirical evidence from the senior executive service. Public Administration Review, 62, 42–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, D. (1997). Politics and administration at the top: Lessons from down under. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esteve, M., van Witteloostuijn, A., & Boyne, G. (2015). The effects of public service motivation on collaborative behavior: Evidence from three experimental games. International Public Management Journal, 18, 171–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, H., & Héritier, A. (2004). Interorganizational negotiation and intraorganizational power in shared decision making early agreements under codecision and their impact on the European parliament and council. Comparative Political Studies, 37, 1184–1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1992). Getting to YES, negotiating an agreement without giving in (2nd ed.). London: Random House Business Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco, L. A., & Rouwette, E. A. J. A. (2016). Exploring the impact of need for closure on model—supported group conflict management. European Journal of Operational Research, 249, 878–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fulmer, I. S., & Barry, B. (2004). The smart negotiator: Cognitive ability and emotional intelligence in negotiation. International Journal of Conflict, 15(3), 245–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, P., & Wright, G. (2009). Decision analysis for management judgemen (3rd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., Jilke, S., Leth Olsen, A., & Tummers, L. (2016). Behavioral public administration: Combining insights from public administration and psychology. Public Administration Review, 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjörne, E., Juhila, K., & van Nijnatten, C. (2010). Negotiating dilemmas in the practices of street-level welfare work. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, 303–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (2000). Paradoxes of public-sector managerialism, old public management and public service bargains. International Public Management Journal, 3, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., & Lodge, M. (2006). The politics of public service bargains: Reward, competency, loyalty and blame. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. (2002). Local democracy, democratic decentralisation and rural development: Theories, challenges and options for policy. Development Policy Review, 19(4), 521–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, T. B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values, an inventory. Administration & Society, 39, 354–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 47(2), 263–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. -H., Koppenjan, J., & Termeer, K. (1995). Managing networks in the public sector: A theoretical study of management strategies in policy networks. Public Administration, 73, 437–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1936). Politics: Who gets what, when, how. New York: P. Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2010). Negotiation (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicky, R., Saunders, D., & Barry, B. (2015). Negotiation (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2010). Corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, D., Ku, G., & Murnighan, J. K. (2008). When winning is everything. Harvard Business Review, 86(5), 78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, A. (2011). How power changes hands: Transition and succession in government. In P. ’t Hart & J. Uhr (Eds.), Public administration (Vol. 91). Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A. (2015). Government transparency in historical perspective: From the ancient regime to open data in the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Administration, 38, 189–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitnick, B. (1996). The hazards of agency. Available at SSRN 1417412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murnighan, J. K., Babcock, L., Thompson, L., & Pillutla, M. (1999). The information dilemma in negotiations: Effects of experience, incentives, and integrative potential. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10, 313–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, P. C. (2006). Comparing public and private sector decision-making practices. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 289–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, K. M. (1997). Groups and solos in context: The effects of accountability on team negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72, 384–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olekalns, M. (2002). Negotiation as social interaction. Australian Journal of Management, 27, 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olekalns, M., Smith, P. L., & Walsh, T. (1996). The process of negotiating: Strategy and timing as predictors of outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 68–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50, 367–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2010). The politics of bureaucracy (6th ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeifer, C. (2011). Risk aversion and sorting into public sector employment. German Economic Review, 12, 85–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., van Thiel, S., & Homburg, V. (2007). New public management in Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G. (2013). Negotiation behavior. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G., & Syna, H. (1985). Mismatching the opponent’s offers in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 103–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H. (1982). The Art and Science of Negotiation. Harvard Law Review, 96. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H., Richardson, J., & Metcalfe, D. (2002). Negotiation analysis: The science and art of collaborative decision making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Franscisco, CA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. G., & Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 447–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehrich, J. K., Lewis, M. A., & George, G. (2014). Are public–private partnerships a healthy option? A systematic literature review. Social Science & Medicine, 113, 110–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saorín-lborra, D., & Carmen, M. (2006). A review of negotiation outcome: A proposal on delimitation and subsequent assessment in joint venture negotiations. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences de l’Administration, 23, 237–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1994). Games real actors could play: Positive and negative coordination in embedded negotiations. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6, 27–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shetty, Y. K. (1979). New look at corporate goals. California Management Review, 22, 71–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, D. B. (1997). Agency policy making and political control: Modeling away the delegation problem. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7, 199–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steenhuisen, B. (2009). Competing public values: Coping strategies in heavily regulated utility industries. Delft: Next Generation Infrastructures Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strausz, R. (1997). Delegation of monitoring in a principal-agent relationship. The Review of Economic Studies, 64, 337–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 161–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tinsley, C. H., O’Connor, K. M., & Sullivan, B. A. (2002). Tough guys finish last: The perils of a distributive reputation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 621–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ury, W. (1993). Getting past NO, negotiating in difficult situations. New York: Bamtam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Bueren, E. M., Klijn, E., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2003). Dealing with wicked problems in networks: Analyzing an environmental debate from a network perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13, 193–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Wal, Z., De Graaf, G., & Lasthuizen, K. (2008). What’s valued most? Similarities and differences between the organizational values of the public and private sector. Public Administration, 86, 465–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenabeele, W. (2007). Toward a public administration theory of public service motivation. Public Management Review, 9, 545–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (2007). Theory of games and economic behavior (60th ed.). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A., & Dake, K. (1990). Theories of risk perception: Who fears what and why? Daedalus, 119, 41–60.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), Research Talent Grant No. 406-13-021.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Management Research, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Robin Bouwman

Authors
  1. Robin Bouwman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robin Bouwman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department for Public Leadership and Social Enterprise—PulSE Faculty of Business and Law , The Open University, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom

    Edoardo Ongaro

  2. Institute for Management Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Sandra Van Thiel

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bouwman, R. (2018). Public Sector Negotiations. In: Ongaro, E., Van Thiel, S. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55269-3_26

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation