Advertisement

Negotiation Process Modelling: From Soft and Tacit to Deliberate

  • Tomasz SzapiroEmail author
Living reference work entry

Abstract

In this chapter an approach to identify the impact of tacit knowledge on the result of negotiation from a mediation perspective is presented. The approach merges different perspectives in negotiation analyses to justify a general framework for identification of tacit knowledge interventions in systematic procedures supporting parties.

References

  1. Anderson DR, Sweeney DJ, Williams TA, Camm JD, Cochran JJ (2017) An introduction to management science: quantitative approach, 15th edn. Cengage, BostonGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrow KJ (1951) Social choice and individual values, Cowles commission monograph 12. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein A (2017) Before interpretation. Univ Chic Law Rev 84(2):567–653Google Scholar
  4. Chatterjee K, Samuelson WF (eds) (2002) Game theory and business applications. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  5. Dane E, Pratt MG (2007) Exploring intuition and its role in managerial decision making. Acad Manag Rev 32(1):33–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Figuera J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis. State of the art surveys. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Gerber M, Wong W, Kodagoda N (2016) How analysts think: intuition, leap of faith and insight. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 2016 annual meeting, pp 173–177, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  8. González-Pachón J, Romero C (2006) An analytical framework for aggregating multiattribute utility functions. J Oper Res Soc 57(10):1241–1247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hogarth RM (2001) Educating intuition. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  10. Hurwicz L (1960) Optimality and informational efficiency in resource allocation processes. In: Arrow K, Karlin S, Suppes P (eds) Mathematical methods in the social sciences. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Hurwicz L (1972) On informationally decentralized systems. In: McGuire CB, Radner R (eds) Decision and organization. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  12. Kamiński B, Kersten G, Szapiro T (eds) (2015) Outlooks and insights on group decision and negotiation. Proceedings of the 15th international conference GDN 2015. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Kersten GE, Szapiro T (1986) Generalized approach to modeling negotiations. EJOR 26(1):142–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuhn HW (1962) Game theory and models of negotiation. J Confl Resolut 6(1):1–4. Game theory, bargaining and international relations (Mar.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhn H, Tucker AW (1958) Theory of Games, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 10:5–10, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Maccoby M (1961) Social psychology of deterrence. Bull At Sci 17:278–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Merritt SM (2011) Affective processes in human-automation interactions. Hum Factors 53(4):356–370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Michalowski W, Szapiro T (1992) A Bi-Reference Procedure for Interactive Multiple Criteria Programming, Operations Research 40(2):247–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Polak P, Szapiro T (2001) On testing performance of a negotiation procedure in distributed environment. In: Köksalan M, Zionts S (eds) Multiple criteria decision making in the new millennium. LEMS, vol 507. pp 93–100, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  20. Raiffa H (1982) The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA/LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Russell SJ, Norvig P (2010) Artificial intelligence. a modern approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Salas E, Wilson K, Burke S, Wightman D (2006) Does crew resource management training work? An update, an extension, and some critical needs. Hum Factors 48:392–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Schelling TC (1960) The Strategy of Conflict, Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Szapiro T (1993) Convergence of the bi-reference procedure in multiple criteria decision making. Ricerca Operativa 23(66):65–86Google Scholar
  25. Szapiro T (2018) On tacit knowledge impacted negotiation compromises. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on group decision and negotiation, Xinjia Jiang, Haiyan Xu, Shawei He, Ginger Y. Ke (wyd.), NUAA discussion papers in economics and management, str. 231–243Google Scholar
  26. Szapiro T, Wojewnik P (2010) Bireference procedure fBIP for interactive multicriteria optimization with fuzzy coefficients. Centr Eur J Econ Model Econ 2(3):169–193Google Scholar
  27. Thibault PJ (1999) Communicating and interpreting relevance through discourse negotiation: an alternative to relevance theory-a reply to Franken. J Pragmatics 31:557, 560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yu P-L (1990) Forming winning strategies. Springer, Belin and HaidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Econometrics, Decision Analysis and Support UnitSGH Warsaw School of EconomicsWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations