In this paper, we develop a typology of bargaining steps for multi-issue negotiations, which is derived from possible changes
in single issues. By considering all combinations of such changes, we create a consistent classification of steps. This classification
forms the basis of an empirical analysis of the impact of different types of bargaining steps on various outcome dimensions
of negotiations. We perform an exploratory analysis based on an ex-post analysis of existing negotiation data, which was collected
over several years using an Internet-based negotiation support system. Empirical results indicate a strong positive impact
of log-rolling strategies and a negative impact of “hard” tactics like insistence on the chances of reaching an agreement.
Contrary to expectations, hard tactics do not improve the efficiency of agreements.
While the 1995 entrants to the EU are by now fully integrated, those joining in 2004 still “enjoy” a secondary status for
a number of years. We attribute this difference to the fact that unlike the former EFTA members joining in 1995, the 2004
entrants formed a group with heterogenous interests, one that lacked the same strong internal economic ties. Not being able
to act as a unified block they had a considerably weaker bargaining position. We support our arguments by qualitative results
from a simple model, a dynamic partition function game based on Yi (Games Econ Behav 20:201–237, 1997) and Morelli and Penelle
(Economic integration as a partition function game 1997).
KeywordsEuropean integration-Externalities-Path dependence
Decision making in virtual teams is gaining momentum due to globalization, mobility of employees, and the need for collective
and rapid decision making by members who are in different locations. These factors resulted in a proliferation of virtual
team software support tools for decision making, the latest of which is social software (also known as collaboration 2.0),
which includes tools such as wikis, blogs, microblogs, discussion forums, and social networking platforms. This paper describes
the potential use of collaboration 2.0 software for improving the process and the specific tasks in virtual group decision
making. The paper proposes a framework for exploring the fitness between social software and the major activities in the group
decision making process and how such tools can be successfully adopted. Specifically, we use a fit-viability model to help
assessing whether social software fit a decision task and what organizational factors are important for such tools to be effective.
Representative research issues related to the use of such tools are also presented.
KeywordsBlogs–Collective intelligence–Collaborative decision making–Discussion forums–Enterprise 2.0–Group support systems–Social networks–Social software Web 2.0–Wikis–Virtual teams
Use of multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) models to aid the group decision process was tested. Two multiple criteria group decision support systems (MCGDSS) were studied, one using the AHP/Tchebycheff method of Iz and the other using Kersten's NEGO system. These systems were compared with a commercial GDSS, VisionQuest. VisionQuest does not include multiple criteria tools. To make the study comparable, VisionQuest was augmented with an ad hoc linear programming model that could generate solutions with specified characteristics requested by the using group. The three systems were compared on the dimensions of solution quality and decision support effectiveness.
One of the hypotheses was that MCDM models would force participants to examine criteria, preferences, and aspirations more thoroughly, thus leading to decisions of better quality. Subjects using the MCGDSSs were expected to have higher mean quality and effectiveness values. However, the quality and effectiveness values of the VisionQuest/ad hoc system were found to be better on the dimension of effectiveness. Explanations for this result are included in the paper.
Another hypothesis was that the AHP/Tchebycheff method of Iz, a value-oriented system, would yield more effective group support than the goal-oriented NEGO system. However, the NEGO system was found to yield solutions with better quality measures than the solutions obtained with the AHP/Tchebycheff system.
Observation of the groups using the MCDM systems indicate that both the AHP/Tchebycheff and NEGO methods can be revised to enhance their effectiveness. The primary difficulty encountered with the AHP/Tchebycheff method was in the large number of pairwise comparisons required by AHP. The NEGO method can be enhanced by including specification of desired attainment levels in the first stage of the method. Both MCDM techniques have potential to benefit group decision support by giving using groups a means to design better solutions.
This paper develops the notion of voluntary cost-sharing as a paradigm for ameliorating pollution: polluters and sufferers
can choose to share the costs of pollution abatement and participate together in reducing pollution. If both polluters and
sufferers each care about the state of the environment but have limited resources, the issue is one of optimality: a better
level of environmental quality could be achieved if polluters and sufferers in a locale share costs of abatement. An example—nitrogen
pollution due to fertilizer for food—is used to demonstrate that a preferred outcome can be obtained with cost sharing among
polluters and consumers as compared to a “Polluter Pays” outcome. Input taxes and ambient subsidies or taxes are also relevant
policy tools with cost-sharing.
This study examines the impact of faultlines within teams on cohesion and conflicts. Faultlines concern the attributes of several team members simultaneously and mirror the structure of diversity within a team. The strength of a faultline indicates the level of similarity within potential subgroups and its width the extent of dissimilarity between them. The faultlines addressed in this study are based upon the demographic characteristics, abilities and personality traits of team members. We also address the interaction of team autonomy on the effects of faultlines. Data for this study were collected by means of questionnaires administered to 99 teams of undergraduate students. The results indicate that demographic faultlines directly impair the functioning of a team. Team autonomy conditioned both the relationship between the strength of the ability faultline and team cohesion and the relationship between the depth of the personality faultline and intra-team conflict. In other words, these faultlines are more detrimental to team functioning when team autonomy is high. Ability faultlines seem to emphasize similarities within subgroups, while personality faultlines accentuate dissimilarities between subgroups.
Cognitive mapping has been used to support strategic planning in business. However, the process has seldom been utilized to
support strategic planning in nonprofit public organizations, where many reporting lines are less clear. This paper describes
how the cognitive mapping process was designed and implemented to help a large academic department identify and merge the
individual goals of faculty members as a first step in creating a strategic plan. Each map was created using the Decision
ExplorerTM software during individual interviews, as opposed to using paper and pencil. An action case approach was used to plan and
evaluate individual mapping sessions. Eliciting individual cognitive maps led to greater engagement by faculty in the strategic
planning process. Nearly all of the participating faculty members believed that the cognitive mapping process was helpful
and insightful and the resulting map was accurate and complete.
This study investigates the applicability of Davis' Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in the user acceptance of electronic collaboration technology. A courseware management tool is used to test the various findings of TAM. Perceived usefulness of the technology emerges as a positive impact on perceived usefulness, and usefulness, in turn, has a negative relationship with system usage. Additionally, certain aspects of system usage influenced student performance in the course. Prior use of the system also affected system use.
With the rapid growth of web-based services and global trade, there is some commercial potential for web-based Negotiation
Support Services (WNSS). This market potential, however, is somewhat untapped. While previous studies had examined WNSS adoption
by individual decision makers, this situation is not fully realistic, as the conformity of all negotiating partners is required
for web-based negotiation to happen. Therefore, this study extends the technology acceptance model for the context of e-negotiation
through the inclusion of perceptions regarding the intention of the negotiating partner to use WNSS (i.e., perceived intentions).
An empirical investigation, based on phone interviews with potential users, supports the research model. The perceived intention
of the negotiating partner to agree to use WNSS was found to have significant positive effect on individuals’ acceptance of
WNSS and its antecedents. Adding this construct into WNSS acceptance theory advances our understanding of WNSS adoption and
provides important insights for scholars and practitioners.
We present three scenarios concerning access to documents in three real world fields of application, which have in common that they are very difficult to support with classical anticipative access control systems. We show, how - based on a highly configurable notification and negotiation service, which is tightly integrated with a classical access control system - the common permission and denial options can be extended with awareness and negotiation and how this approach supports the three initial access scenarios. We also introduce our implementation of the notification and negotiation service in the PoliTeam project.
The use of computer-based simulation models has a long history in areas such as environmental planning and policy-making, and particularly in water management. Policy making in these areas is often characterized by inherent conflict among diverse stakeholders with divergent interests. Although simulation models have been shown to be helpful for such problems, they are typically under the control of a technical analyst or governmental agency and are not available to negotiators in real time. Recent trends in computer technology and user expectations raise the possibility of real-time, user-controlled models for supporting negotiation. But is such accessibility likely to be helpful? This study used a "compressed" longitudinal experiment to investigate the impacts of different scenarios of accessibility of computer-based simulation models. The task was based on a real-life problem in Colorado River water management. Results revealed no significant differences among conditions for either solution quality or satisfaction. These results suggest that the common notion of "more is better" may be inappropriate, and resources for improving computer support of negotiation might best be focused elsewhere.
This paper uses a new diagramming method, cognitive-affective mapping, to analyze the emotional changes in the 1978 Camp David
negotiations that led to a breakthrough accord between Egypt and Israel. We use the technique to model the mental states of
the two primary negotiators, Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin, based on detailed descriptions provided in Jimmy Carter’s memoirs.
From Carter’s account of the emotional states of the Egyptian and Israeli leaders, we generate maps that show how the attitudes
of both Sadat and Begin shifted over the course of the deliberations, eventually leading to resolution of a major conflict.
Such methods for facilitating recognition and reconciliation of emotional differences between disputants may contribute to
movement toward peaceful and satisfying settlements.
KeywordsEmotion–Negotiation–Camp David accords–Cognition–Diagrams–Conflict resolution–Attitudes
There is renewed interest in the factors that affect negotiations, as they are a significant part of organizational life.
While we understand that there are many barriers to effectively reaching optimal solutions in a negotiation, we are still
unclear as to the means by which to meet this goal. In this paper, we offer creativity training as a possible antecedent to
effective negotiation. Our results show that individuals trained to think creatively reached more integrative solutions or
solutions that were mutually beneficial to all negotiation participants than individuals who did not receive creativity training.
We discuss implications and future research.
In the U.S. there is a close relationship between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), a governmental agency legally
responsible for setting accounting standards, and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), a private sector body to
whom the SEC has delegated this responsibility. In this paper we examine the influence of the SEC on the FASB as evidenced
by all major statements issued by the FASB. Minor statements, amendments, and strictly technical pronouncements were omitted
because of their limited exposure to the political process. Our analysis reveals that the SEC applied substantial pressure
on the FASB in the standard setting process and has not adopted a position of benign neglect.
KeywordsAccounting standards setting process–Group decision–FASB–U.S. Congress
This study is an exercise in theory building. It begins from the premise that current theory with respect to the setting of
accounting standards is inadequate. We advance current theory by incorporating new ideas from sociology (issues network theory,
see Heclo (1978, In: King A (ed) The New American Political System. American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC, pp 87–124)
and social psychology (values structure ideas drawn from Shakun (1988, Evolutionary system design: policy making under complexity
and group decision support systems. Holden-Day, Inc., Oakland, CA). In doing so, we extend previous theorizing on the accounting
standard setting process (e.g., triocracy theory). Issue network theory holds that groups with intellectual, ideological and
economic interests have interests in, and may exert efforts to influence, policy adoption. It is a natural outgrowth of, and
important extension to, triocracy theory. We draw on Shakun’s (1988, Evolutionary system design: policy making under complexity
and group decision support systems. Holden-Day, Inc., Oakland, CA) Evolutionary Systems Design theory to elucidate a theory
of motivation. We argue that complex motivational structures influence the behaviors of the parties to the accounting standard
setting process. As part of this effort, we categorize the guiding terminal values, instrumental values and operational goals
that guide participant behaviors. We draw on previous literature to document parts of the model.
This paper describes two empirical studies of interpersonal understanding in negotiations. In the first study, the accuracy of post-negotiation estimates of the other negotiator's payoff was assessed after a role-playing simulation. Only a minority of participants exhibited evidence of the fixed pie bias, in which negotiators view all negotiations as distributive, fixed-sum situations. Participants' estimates of the other negotiator's payoff were generally better fit by the equal payoffs model, which presumes that participants believe the other negotiator's payoff is the same as one's own. This held true for both distributive task structures in which the fixed-pie view is descriptively appropriate and integrative negotiation task structures in which the fixed-pied view is inaccurate. The results did not support the hypothesis that superior understanding about the other negotiator's interests helps negotiators to achieve better outcomes for themselves; the correlation between predictive accuracy and the value of participants' own payoffs was generally low.
A second study was conducted to test the hypothesis that negotiators typically see negotiations as fundamentally a distributive, fixed pie problem, but believe their own negotiated agreements yield roughly equal payoffs to both negotiators. The results supported this hypothesis. In this second study, participants estimated the other negotiator's payoffs over a sample of hypothetical contracts. The payoff schedule estimation procedure, which has been widely used in previous research, was not used in the present research because it was shown to have serious methodological, conceptual, and procedural problems in the context of the present study.
We examined accuracy in detecting the truths and lies of 10 videotaped students who offered their opinions on the death penalty or smoking in public. Student lie detectors were randomly assigned to either the individual condition, where they reported their veracity judgments and confidence independently, or the small group condition, where they recorded their judgments privately and then deliberated with 5 other students before making a consensus judgment of lie, truth, or hung. Results indicated that small group judgments were more accurate than individual judgments when judging deceptive but not truthful communication. Small group individuals also reported greater confidence in their abilities after the task. Finally, groups with a greater number of hung judgments were more accurate, likely due to their employing hung judgments for the most difficult to judge stimulus communicators. These results raise implications for real life group judgments, particularly in light of the increasing availability of technology.
This paper investigates strategies for the acquisition of consumer preference information by a market researcher. Such preference information is obtained by the market researcher through an experimental process that entails polling consumers about their preference profiles with a view to completely specifying the preference order. In this paper, we limit the focus to one or two consumers.
In this environment, the experiments are pairwise comparisons between resource bundles about which there is no a-priori preference information. Each such experiment can have three possible signals: one bundle is more preferred, indifferent, or less preferred over another. Choice of an experiment in the experimental sequence is important because different choices result in different average amounts of information.
For the analysis the paper establishes a link between preference theory and lattice path counting. Combinatorial arguments that allow the market researcher to calculate quantities of information at the start of the information acquisition process are presented. A recursion for finding the impact of choosing different experiments on the average values of information gain is constructed. The paper studies how the experiments chosen subsequently can affect the elimination of other experiments from the experimental set and thus have an effect on the efficiency of information acquisition. The measures derived could be used by the market researcher as a benchmark with which to compare information gathering strategies.
Faith-based (spiritual) and secular-based (rational) approaches to problem solving and negotiation are commonly viewed as strongly conflicting approaches. While analysis is used in faith-based problem solving, problem solutions can come directly from God (One, all there is) in which case advocates say that analysis is not really necessary. Problem solutions can also come from religious laws and practices providing values that serve as intermediates/surrogates (Section 11) for connectedness with God. These religious laws and practices are based on analysis and interpretation – much of it quite rational – of God's word/scriptures, the latter providing religious axioms. Axioms for secular-based problem solving follow scientific method. Faith and secular belief systems differ, but share some values. For advocates of secular-based problem solving, faith-based solutions (actions) that differ from the results of their own rational analyses are hard to accept. Rationality and spirituality represent different brain capabilities. Extending rationality to spiritual rationality can integrate these capabilities. With spiritual-rationality problem solving, an individual – whether his orientation is primarily faith-based or secular-based – validates a problem solution both rationally and spiritually for right action (decision) using a spiritual rationality validation test. If the solution is not valid, the individual continues problem solving trying to validate spiritual rationality of a solution.
With spiritual rationality both a faith-based advocate and a secular-based advocate can each achieve internal consistency of rationality and spirituality. Conflict between them could still exist. However, their common adoption of spiritual rationality and the Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) framework – providing a common methodology that highlights high-level purpose shared by individuals – can facilitate problem evolution leading to group agreed-upon solution (right action).
The core axiom of ESD/spiritual-rationality problem solving is that individuals (agents) have a shared inherent purpose to experience connectedness with One. In integrating spirituality and rationality, spiritual rationality – by validating right action in problem solving and negotiation – can help maintain connectedness with One as shared inherent purpose in an individual's life.
During an action research study a collaborative business engineering approach was developed, applied, and evaluated. Key characteristic of the approach is its focus on the participative design of organizational processes and supporting information systems. Following the approach, various design activities are carried out in close cooperation with groups of stakeholders supported by a Group Support System (GSS). This paper describes and reflects on the execution of these collaborative design activities in a police organization. Lessons learned with respect to GSS and collaborative design are formulated. Key insights illustrate the stakeholders' perception of the group technology and the way in which it facilitated an efficient design process.
Inspections represent key activities in construction projects. They allow coordinating the work of the main contractor and
the subcontracted companies participating in the project. Today the inspection activities and the coordination process are
done using information recorded into paper-based blueprints. As a consequence of it, coordinating the activities derived from
inspection processes become expensive, slow and error-prone. This paper presents a mobile shared workspace, named COIN (Construction
Inspector), which helps the participants in a construction project to overcome these limitations. COIN was particularly designed
to be used on tablet PCs, but it is able to run on several computing devices. This workspace has been tested in a controlled
work scenario. The preliminary results are highly positive, indicating this proposal could have an important impact on the
construction management process.
KeywordsCoordination process–Mobile shared workspaces–Loosely-coupled work–Mobile collaboration–Construction management