The process of assisted negotiations: A network analysis

This article introduces network analysis as a supplement to current research on the process of negotiations. We briefly review the literature on negotiations involving third parties, and argue that to understand fully the dynamics of dispute resolution, it is important to examine processes in addition to outcomes. We propose social network methods as a way to examine systematically the step-by-step process through which self-interested third parties influence negotiated outcomes. To illustrate, we analyze process data from triads in an agent-assisted negotiation. We describe three classes of results. First, we describe the basic properties of the third-party-assisted negotiation process (e.g., we found agents to be the most active players in the negotiation process—they initiate interactions significantly more frequently than buyers or sellers). Second, we study the changes in the process characteristics due to experimental conditions (i.e., we found the interactive patterns to vary depending on the information made available to the third party). Finally, we examine the relationships between the systematic process measures and standard outcome measures. We argue that these measures are complementary, and that the process should be informative with respect to interpreting, predicting, and managing outcomes.

[1]  The process of divorce , 1985 .

[2]  S Wasserman,et al.  Statistical analysis of discrete relational data. , 1986, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[3]  W. Peacock,et al.  Chitinase, beta-1,3-glucanase, osmotin, and extensin are expressed in tobacco explants during flower formation. , 1990, The Plant cell.

[4]  A. Pettigrew.  Information Control as a Power Resource , 1972 .

[5]  M. V. Valkenburg.  Network Analysis , 1964 .

[6]  Jeffrey Z. Rubin,et al.  When should we use agents? Direct vs. representative negotiation , 1988 .

[7]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. , 1986 .

[8]  J. Hiltrop.  Mediator Behavior and the Settlement of Collective Bargaining Disputes in Britain , 1985 .

[9]  H. Raiffa.  The art and science of negotiation , 1983 .

[10]  S. Wasserman,et al.  A General Framework for the Statistical Analysis of Sequential Dyadic Interaction Data , 1988 .

[11]  S Wasserman,et al.  Dyadic Social Interactions , 1987, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  J. C. Campbell,et al.  Dynamics of third party intervention : Kissinger in the Middle East , 1981 .

[13]  P. Bonacich.  Communication networks and collective action , 1987 .

[14]  Roger V. Gould,et al.  Structures of Mediation: A Formal Approach to Brokerage in Transaction Networks , 1989 .

[15]  Donald W. Jackson,et al.  Effects of Alternative Types of Influence Strategies under Different Channel Dependence Structures , 1990 .

[16]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Separating individual and group effects , 1985 .

[17]  Kathleen L. Valley,et al.  The Effect of Agents and Mediators on Negotiation Outcomes , 1992 .

[18]  Blair H. Sheppard.  Third party conflict intervention: A procedural framework. , 1984 .

[19]  C. O'Reilly.  The use of information in organizational decision making: A model and some propositions. , 1983 .

[20]  Karl R. Krohn,et al.  Positions, Roles, and Dependencies in a Community Interorganization System* , 1984 .

[21]  Peter J. Carnevale,et al.  Strategic choice in mediation , 1986 .

[22]  Stuart S. Nagel,et al.  Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis , 1976 .

[23]  T. Tyler,et al.  The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice , 1988 .

[24]  K. Kressel,et al.  The process of divorce : how professionals and couples negotiate settlements , 1987 .