Summary
Practitioners are frequently facing situations where they have to resolve a conflict via electronic communication media such as e-mail. To understand how conflicts can be managed in computer-mediated communication settings, we conducted a laboratory experiment analyzing the interaction between negotiators in their attempt to resolve a given conflict. We applied content and analysis on the negotiation transcripts and identified distinct phases with different foci of negotiators. The first phase, differentiation phase, is characterized by open conflict and arguing of the counterparts whereas the following integration phase aims at creating a positive climate as well as discussing possible problem solutions. Between the two phases, there is a shift in behaviors, i.e. from providing information in the differentiation phase towards using tactics and exchanging offers in the integration phase. A special emphasis is put on the effect of prior negotiator relationship. Negotiators who personally know each other manage conflicts with high intensity better and reach more agreements. We conclude that practitioners can manage conflicts better being aware of different phases in negotiation processes. Moreover, we recommend offering kick-off meetings for electronic negotiations in order to strengthen interpersonal relationships between negotiators.
Zusammenfassung
Immer öfter sind Praktiker damit konfrontiert, Konflikte mittels elektronischer Kommunikation wie beispielsweise E-Mail zu lösen. Um zu verstehen, wie Konflikte in computervermittelter Kommunikation bewältigt werden, wurde ein Laborexperiment durchgeführt, in dem die Interaktion zwischen den Verhandlern analysiert wurde. Inhaltsanalyse sowie Phasenanalyse wurde für die Transkripte der Verhandlungen angewendet, und es konnten deutlich verschiedene Phasen identifiziert werden. Die erste Phase, Differenzierung, besteht darin, dass ein offener Konflikt diskutiert wird. Die darauf folgende Integrationsphase beabsichtigt die Schaffung eines positiven Klimas, in dem mögliche Lösungen besprochen werden. Eine Verlagerung von Informationsbereitstellung in der Differenzierungsphase hin zur Verwendung von Taktiken und dem Austausch von Angeboten in der Integrationsphase wird beobachtet. Ein spezieller Schwerpunkt wurde auf den Effekt von persönlicher Beziehung der Verhandler gelegt. Verhandler, die einander kennen, lösen Konflikte mit hoher Intensität besser und kommen auch öfter zu einer Einigung. Wir folgern, dass Praktiker Konflikte besser bewältigen wenn sie sich der unterschiedlichen Phasen im Verhandlungsprozess bewusst sind. Darüber hinaus werden Vorab-Treffen empfohlen, um die interpersonale Beziehung zwischen Verhandlern zu verstärken.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adair, W. L., and Brett, J. M. (2005). ’The Negotiation Dance: Time, Culture, and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation’. Organization Science 16(1), 33–51.
Brett, J. M., Shapiro, D. L., and Lytle, A. L. (1998). ’Breaking the Bonds of Reciprocity in Negotiations’. Academy of Management Journal 41(4), 410–424.
Chenault, B. G. (1998). ’Developing Personal and Emotional Relationships Via Computer-Mediated Communication’. Computer Mediated Communication Magazine(May), 1–19.
Cohen, J. (1960). ’A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales’. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, 37–46.
Donohue, W. A. (1996). ’An Empirical Examination of Three Models of Integrative and Distributive Bargaining’. International Journal of Conflict Management 7(3), 209–229.
Druckman, D., and Hopmann, T. (2002). “Content Analysis”, in V. A. Kremenyuk (Ed.), International Negotiation: Analysis, Approaches, Issues (pp. 288–314). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., and Sethna, B. N. (1991). ’The Equalization Phenomenon: Status Effects in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Decision-Making Groups’. Human-Computer Interaction 6, 119–146.
Folger, J., Hewes, D., and Poole, M. (1984). “Coding Social Interaction”, in B. Dervin & M. Voight (Eds.), Progress in Communication Sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 115–161). Norwood: Ablex.
Guetzkow, H. (1950). ’Unitizing and Categorizing Problems in Coding Qualitative Data’. Journal of Clinical Psychology 6, 47–58.
Gulliver, P. H. (1979). Disputes and Negotiations: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Halpern, J. (1994). ’The Effect of Friendship on Personal Business Transactions’. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 38(4), 647–664.
Hebert, L., and Beamish, P. (2002). “Cooperative Stratgeis between Firms: Internation Joint Ventures”, in M. Gannon & K. Newman (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management (pp. 78–98). Oxford: Blackwell.
Holmes, M. E. (1997). ’Optimal Machting Analysis of Negotiation Phase Sequences in Simulated and Authentic Hostage Negotiations’. Communication Reports, 1–8.
Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Kersten, G. E. (2004). E-Negotiation Systems: Interaction of People and Technologies to Resolve Conflicts. Paper presented at the UNESCAP Third Annual forum on Online Dispute Resolution, Melbourne, Australia, 5–6 July 2004.
Kilmann, R. H., and Thomas, K. W. (1977). ’Developing a Forced-Choice Measure of Conflict Handling Behavior: The “Mode” Instrument’. Emotional and Psychological Measurement 37, 309–325.
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P. E., and Gibson, C. B. (2004). ’The Impact of Team Empowerment on Virtual Team Performance: The Moderating Role of Face-to-Face Interaction’. Academy of Management Journal 47(2), 175–192.
Koeszegi, S. T., Pesendorfer, E.-M., and Stolz, S. W. (2006). ’Gender Salience in Electronic Negotiations’. Electronic Markets — The International Journal EM 16(3), 173–185.
Koeszegi, S. T., Srnka, K. J., and Pesendorfer, E.-M. (2006). ’Electronic Negotiations — a Comparison of Different Support Systems’. Die Betriebswirtschaft 66(4), 441–463.
Kosnik, R. D., and Shapiro, D. L. (1997). ’Agency Conflicts between Investment Banks and Corporate Clients in Merger and Acquisition Transactions: Causes and Remedies’. Academy of Management Executive 11(1), 7–20.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Kurtzberg, T., and Husted Medvec, V. (2003). “Can We Negotiate and Still Be Friends?” in Roy J. Lewicki, David M. Saunders, John W. Minton & B. Barry (Eds.), Negotiation. Readings, Exercises, and Cases (Vol. 4, pp. 281–286). Boston: McGraw Hill.
Lax, D. A., and Sebenius, J. (1986). The Manager as Negotiator: Bargaining for Cooperation and Competitive Gain. New York: The Free Press.
Maynard, M. (1997). Chrysler, Uaw Reach Deal at Eninge Plant. USA Today, Mary 8: 3B.
Mayring, P. (2002). “Qualitative Content Analysis — Research Instrument or Mode of Interpretation?” in M. Kriegelmann (Ed.), The Role of the Researcher in Qualitative Psychology (pp. 139–148). Tübingen: Huber.
McGinn, K. L., and Keros, A. T. (2002). ’Improvisation and the Logic of Exchange in Socially Embedded Transactions’. Administrative Science Quarterly 47, 442–473.
Misino, D. J., and Contu, D. L. (2002). ’Negotiating without a Net: A Conversation with the Nypd’s Dominik J. Misino’. Harvard Business Review 80(10), 49–54.
Moore, D. A., Kurtzberg, T. R., Thompson, L. L., and Morris, M. W. (1999). ’Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 77(1), 22–43.
Morley, I. E., and Stephensen, J. M. (1977). The Social Psychology of Bargaining. London: Allen & Unwin.
Munduate, L., Ganaza, J., Peiro, J., and Euwema, M. (1999). ’Patterns of Styles in Conflict Management and Effectiveness’. International Journal of Conflict Management 10(1), 5–24.
Neale, M. A., and Bazerman, M. H. (1992). ’Negotiator Cognitive and Rationality: A Behavioral Decision Theory Perspective’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 41(2), 157–175.
Olekalns, M., Brett, J. M., and Weingart, L. R. (2003). ’Phases, Transitions and Interruptions: Modeling Processes in Multi-Party Negotiations’. International Journal of Conflict Management 14(3/4), 191–211.
Olekalns, M., and Smith, P. L. (2000). ’Negotiating Optimal Outcomes: The Role of Strategic Sequences in Competitive Negotiations’. Human Communication Research 24, 528–560.
Olekalns, M., and Smith, P. L. (2003). ’Testing the Relationships among Negotiators’ Motivational Orientations, Strategy Choices, and Outcomes’. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 39, 191–117.
Parks, M. R., and Floyd, K. (1995). ’Making Friends in Cyberspace’. Journal of Communication 46(1), 80–97.
Pesendorfer, E.-M., and Koeszegi, S. T. (2006). ’Hot Versus Cool Behavioural Styles in Electronic Negotiations: The Impact of Communication Mode’. Group Decision and Negotiation 15(2), 141–155.
Poole, M. S., Shannon, D. L., and DeSanctis, G. L. (1992). “Communication Media and Negotiation Process”, in L. L. Putnam & M. E. Roloff (Eds.), Communication and Negotiation (Vol. 20, pp. 46–66). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Putnam, L. L., and Jones, T. S. (1982). ’Reciprocity in Negotiations: An Analysis of Bargaining Interaction’. Communication Monographs 48, 171–191.
Schelling, T. C. (1960). The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Simons, T. (1993). ’Speech Patterns and the Concept of Utility in Cognitive Maps: The Case of Integrative Bargaining’. Academy of Management Journal 36(1), 139–156.
Spears, R., and Lea, M. (1992). “Social Influence and the Influence of the ’social’ in Computer Mediated Communication”, in M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication (pp. 30–65). London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
Sproull, L., and Kiesler, S. (1986). ’Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication’. Management Science 32(11), 1492–1512.
Srnka, K. J., and Koeszegi, S. T. (2007). ’From Words to Numbers — How to Transform Rich Qualitative Data into Meaningful Quantitative Results: Guidelines and Exemplary Study’. Schmalenbach’s Business Review, Vol. 59 of Zfbf, pp. 29–57.
Tan, B. C. Y., Wei, K., Watson, R. T., and Walczuch, R. (1998). ’Reducing Status Effects with Computer-Mediated Communication: Evidence from Two Distinct National Cultures.” Journal of Management Information Systems 15(1), 119–141.
Thompson, L., Lowenstein, D., and Gentner, D. (2000). ’Avoiding Missed Opportunities in Managerial Life: Analogical Training More Powerful Than Case-Based Training’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82(1), 60–75.
Tyrell, P. (1993). Cathay Ready to Reinstate Cabin Crew. South China Morning Post, January 20th, 1.
van De Vliert, E. (1997). Complex Interpersonal Conflict Behaviour: Theoretical Frontiers. London: Psychology Press.
Walton, R. E. (1969). Interpersonal Peacemaking. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weingart, L. R., Brett, J. M., and Olekalns, M. (2002). Conflicting Social Motives in Negotiation Groups. Paper presented at the Academy of Management, Denver, Collorado.
Weingart, L. R., and Olekalns, M. (2004). “Communication Processes in Negotiation: Frequencies, Sequences, and Phases”, in M. J. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The Handbook of Negotiation and Culture (pp. 143–157). Stanford, CA: University Press.
Weingart, L. R., Olekalns, M., and Smith, P. L. (2004). ’Quantitative Coding of Negotiation Behavior’. International Negotiation 9, 441–455.
Weingart, L. R., Thompson, L. L., Bazerman, M. H., and Carroll, J. S. (1990). ’Tactical Behavior and Negotiation Outcomes’. The International Journal of Conflict Management 1(1), 7–31.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pesendorfer, EM., Graf, A. & Koeszegi, S.T. Relationship in electronic negotiations: Tracking behavior over time. Z. Betriebswirtsch 77, 1315–1338 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-007-0327-6
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-007-0327-6
Keywords
- Conflict management
- electronic negotiations
- interpersonal relationship
- conflict level
- negotiation process
- content analysis
- phase analysis