Intra-Team Strategies for Teams Negotiating Against Competitor, Matchers, and Conceders

Under some circumstances, a group of individuals may need to negotiate together as a negotiation team against another party. Unlike bilateral negotiation between two individuals, this type of negotiations entails to adopt an intra-team strategy for negotiation teams in order to make team decisions and accordingly negotiate with the opponent. It is crucial to be able to negotiate successfully with heterogeneous opponents since opponents’ negotiation strategy and behavior may vary in an open environment. While one opponent might collaborate and concede over time, another may not be inclined to concede. This paper analyzes the performance of recently proposed intra-team strategies for negotiation teams against different categories of opponents: competitors, matchers, and conceders. Furthermore, it provides an extension of the negotiation tool Genius for negotiation teams in bilateral settings. Consequently, this work facilitates research in negotiation teams.

[1]  Vicent J. Botti,et al.  Analyzing intra-team strategies for agent-based negotiation teams , 2011, AAMAS.

[2]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Coordinating multiple concurrent negotiations , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[3]  Reid G. Smith,et al.  The Contract Net Protocol: High-Level Communication and Control in a Distributed Problem Solver , 1980, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[4]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  The Benefits of Opponent Models in Negotiation , 2009, 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology.

[5]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  A decentralized model for automated multi-attribute negotiations with incomplete information and general utility functions , 2008, Multiagent Grid Syst..

[6]  Leigh Thompson,et al.  Negotiating teams: A levels of analysis approach. , 2001 .

[7]  Niels van Galen Last.  Agent Smith: Opponent Model Estimation in Bilateral Multi-issue Negotiation , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[8]  Catholijn M. Jonker,et al.  An Agent Architecture for Multi-Attribute Negotiation , 2001, IJCAI.

[9]  D. Marc Kilgour,et al.  Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation , 2014, Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation.

[10]  Hiroki Sayama,et al.  Negotiating Complex Contracts , 2003 .

[11]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[12]  Valentin Robu,et al.  Modeling complex multi-issue negotiations using utility graphs , 2005, AAMAS '05.

[13]  Khalid Mansour,et al.  A Meta-Strategy for Coordinating of One-to-Many Negotiation over Multiple Issues , 2011 .

[14]  P. Cochat,et al.  Et al , 2008, Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie.

[15]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  GENIUS: AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENT FOR SUPPORTING THE DESIGN OF GENERIC AUTOMATED NEGOTIATORS , 2012, Comput. Intell..

[16]  Milind Tambe,et al.  The Benefits of Arguing in a Team , 1999, AI Mag..

[17]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  A Tit for Tat Negotiation Strategy for Real-Time Bilateral Negotiations , 2013, Complex Automated Negotiations.

[18]  Vicent J. Botti,et al.  Modeling Power Distance and Individualism/Collectivism in Negotiation Team Dynamics , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[19]  Bo An,et al.  Continuous-Time Negotiation Mechanism for Software Agents , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[20]  Erika D Peterson,et al.  Team Negotiation: An Examination of Integrative and Distributive Bargaining , 1996 .

[21]  H. L. Poutré,et al.  Constructing the Structure of Utility Graphs Used in Multi-Item Negotiation Through Collaborative Filtering of Aggregate Buyer Preferences , 2008 .

[22]  Vicent J. Botti,et al.  Reaching Unanimous Agreements Within Agent-Based Negotiation Teams With Linear and Monotonic Utility Functions , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[23]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations , 2011, Studies in Computational Intelligence.

[24]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  IAMhaggler: A Negotiation Agent for Complex Environments , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[25]  Harri Ehtamo,et al.  Searching for joint gains in multi-party negotiations , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[26]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  Secure and efficient protocols for multiple interdependent issues negotiation , 2010, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[27]  Hannu Nurmi,et al.  Voting Systems for Social Choice , 2010, Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation.

[28]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Towards a Quantitative Concession-Based Classification Method of Negotiation Strategies , 2011, PRIMA.

[29]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  An Implementation of the Contract Net Protocol Based on Marginal Cost Calculations , 1993, AAAI.

[30]  Ivan Marsá-Maestre,et al.  Effective bidding and deal identification for negotiations in highly nonlinear scenarios , 2009, AAMAS.

[31]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  The First Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC 2010) , 2012, New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations.

[32]  Katsuhide Fujita,et al.  Compromising Strategy Based on Estimated Maximum Utility for Automated Negotiation Agents Competition (ANAC-10) , 2011, IEA/AIE.

[33]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Multiagent Systems - Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations , 2009 .

[34]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents , 1998, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[35]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Negotiating Concurrently with Unknown Opponents in omplex, Real-Time Domains , 2012, ECAI.

[36]  Vicent J. Botti,et al.  Studying the impact of negotiation environments on negotiation teams' performance , 2016, Inf. Sci..