Microsoft Word - Mgmt8647 Negotiation Behaviour

8/3/2019 Microsoft Word - Mgmt8647 Negotiation Behaviour

1/22

Negotiation Behaviour 8647

1

MBA

Unit Outline

MGMT8647

Negotiation Behaviour

Summer School2009

Business Schoolwww.business.uwa.edu.au

This unit examines the process of reaching agreement through

negotiation. Students develop an understanding of negotiationthrough practical exploration of competition and co-operation,strategic choice, the dynamics of phases and the processes ofinteraction. The emphasis is on developing a considered strategicapproach which has application in business and other contexts. Ahigh degree of participation is required.


2/22


2

All material reproduced herein has been copied in accordance with and pursuant to a statutory licenceadministered by Copyright Agency Limited (CAL), granted to the University of Western Australia pursuant toPart VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).

Copying of this material by students, except for fair dealing purposes under the Copyright Act, is prohibited.For the purposes of this fair dealing exception, students should be aware that the rule allowing copying, for fairdealing purposes, of 10% of the work, or one chapter/article, applies to the original work from which theexcerpt in this course material was taken, and not to the course material itself.

The University of Western Australia 2009


3/22


3

Contact Details

Lecturer Dr Sandra Kiffin-PetersenEmail [email protected] 6488 3070Fax 6488 1072

Room 2.13 GP3 BuildingConsultation Hours TBC

Your Lecturer

Dr Sandra Kiffin-Petersen PhD MBA (UWA) BA (Murd) BAppSc (Curtin)Sandra Kiffin-Petersen joined the GSM in 2001 having previously taught Organisational Behaviour at theDepartment of Organisational and Labour Studies at the University of Western Australia. Sandra lectureson the Organisational Behaviour and Negotiation MBA units. After completing her MBA in 1992 Sandraworked as a private consultant before becoming a lecturer and pursuing further studies. Sandra has a Phdin Organisational Behaviour from the University of Western Australia. Her research interests includenegotiation skills training, emotions in the workplace, work team effectiveness and trust within

organisations. She has presented papers at conferences in the UK, United States and in Australia. Sandraregularly conducts workshops on Building High Performance Work Teams and Negotiation skills training inindustry.

Sandra is a member of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM) and theAcademy of Management (USA).

In 2004 Sandra received an Excellence in Teaching Award for her teaching in Organisational Behaviour.She was also nominated in 2001 for a University Excellence in Teaching Award and in 2005 for thePearson Education ANZAM Management Educator of the Year Award. Sandra was nominated for anInnovation in Teaching Award in 2006 and for an Excellence in Teaching Award in 2008 for the StrategicNegotiation unit of the Executive MBA.

INTRODUCTION

"Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fearto negotiate." ~ John F. Kennedy

Managers negotiate at work everyday. They may negotiate with theirbosses, colleagues and subordinates, as well as with suppliers,customers and government officials. Negotiation is therefore anessential skill for every manager. This unit provides senior managerswith the opportunity to develop their negotiation skills experientially andto understand the various approaches to negotiation. Emphasis isplaced on the use of negotiation exercises and role-playing, and onstudents developing their understanding of their own negotiation stylethrough self-assessments. The course is designed to be relevant to awide variety of negotiation situations that a senior manager may face.

The Goal of the Unit

The aim is to develop your understanding of the dynamics of the process of negotiation. This will beachieved through an exploration of the theories of negotiation and the exercise of various negotiatingtechniques. One of the central themes will be an examination of the nature of cooperation in negotiation.


4/22


4

Learning Outcomes

On completion of this unit, you should:

know the central models or frameworks for understanding thenegotiation process

understand and be able to distinguish the core strategies innegotiation which are associated with these models

be aware of the individual behavioural skills involved in face toface negotiation and have enhanced your own skill level

be able to critically examine the literature on the subject ofnegotiation

be able to effectively negotiate more constructive agreements

To achieve these objectives the course uses regular role play negotiation exercises with class debriefing

and discussions, and case studies.

TEACHING AND LEARNING RESPONSIBILITIES

Teaching and Learning Strategies

This course is structured around an experiential approach to learning and the development of interpersonaland negotiation skills. A high degree of participation is expected from students in order to maximise theirlearning from the course. Kolbs experiential learning cycle shown below demonstrates that there are twomain ways students can learn about negotiation, through direct experiencesof negotiation during class time

and in their workplaces; and through the comprehension of the theory and practice of negotiation byreading the literature on the subject and participating in class discussions. Video and television equipmentwill also be used to aid in the learning process. The actual topics covered and the exercises may change asthe trimester progresses, depending on the particular interests of the group.

You are encouraged to take a reflective approach to your negotiation, one of the characteristics of betternegotiators is that they take time out to think about what they have done and how it might be improved nexttime.

"Information is a negotiator's greatest weapon."~ Victor Kiam, CEO of Remington


5/22


5

Charter of Student Rights

This Charter of Student Rights upholds the fundamental rights of students who undertake their educationat the University of Western Australia.

It recognises that excellence in teaching and learning requires students to be active participants in theireducational experience. It upholds the ethos that in addition to the Universitys role of awarding formal

academic qualifications to students, the University must strive to instill in all students independentscholarly learning, critical judgment, academic integrity and ethical sensitivity. The charter outlines therights and responsibilities for both students and staff of the University and you are encouraged to refer tothe charter at:http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au/info/student_rights/charter.shtml

Use of Student Feedback

Students usually find the Negotiation unit enjoyable and useful. However, we are always looking forways to improve how we teach negotiation. Recent changes have seen the incorporation of theThespian Exercise as a form of assessment in Negotiation. Ethics involved in negotiating has also beenincorporated into the unit after feedback from students and the business community in general.

TEXTBOOKS AND RESOURCES

Textbook

Lewicki, R.J., Barry, B. and Saunders, D.M. (2008) Negotiation (6th ed) Boston, Irwin McGraw-Hill

The book should be purchased as it will serve as a standard reference book.

* ensure that you do not purchase the book of readings and cases by the same authors.

A number of key readings have also been compiled to supplement thetextbook. Other particularly useful books are Bazerman and Neale (1992);Lewicki, Hiam and Olander (1996); Putnam and Roloff (1992); Pruitt andCarnevale (1993); Rojot (1991); Rubin, Pruitt and Kim (1994), Thompson(1998) and Watkins (2002). Three useful journals are:

International Journal of Conflict Management P303.69 P1Journal of Conflict Resolution P341.05 P1Negotiation Journal P302.305 P1

A reference list of books and articles also appears at the end of this unit outline.


6/22


6

ASSESSMENT MECHANISM

The Purpose of Assessment

There are a number of reasons for having assessable tasks as part of an academic program. Theassessable tasks are designed to encourage you to explore and understand the subject more fully. The

fact that we grade your work then gives you an indication of how much you have achieved. Providingfeedback on your work also serves as part of the learning process.

Assessment Details

Component Weight Due Date

Assignment 1The Thespian Exercise

30% Day 5 of SummerSchool

Assignment 2Individual Learning Journal 35% 6

th February 5pm

Assignment 3

Self Reflection Exercise35% 20th February 5pm

Assessment 1: The Thespian Exercise

The purpose of this assessment is to assess your ability to practically apply the theory of negotiation.

Description

Working in groups of four or five you are to develop a negotiating scenario which the Russell Crowesand Kate Blanchetts among you then act out!! The aim will be to realistically demonstrate a particularaspect of negotiation theory and practice. The group presentation will also include a class discussion,with a handout prepared by the group.

The scenario you choose should be a reconstruction of a work-related negotiation (or part thereof) thatone of the members of your group has been involved in or is aware of. You should consult with thelecturer to ensure that your topic and approach is appropriate.

You will also be required to conduct a discussion with the rest of the class to explore the chosen aspectof negotiation further and prepare a four page handout (1.5 spaced) as an aide memoire for your fellowstudents which addresses the underlying theory and research, and the application of it in practice. It isexpected that groups will draw on at least 6 relevant academic articles in their handout (these articlesshould be in addition to the readings already provided to you). The handout should also be submitted tothe lecturer for assessment as part of the thespian exercise. Each group will have a total of 30 minutesfor their presentation (i.e. the negotiation scenario and the class discussion so plan your timeaccordingly).

It should be fun but the main aim is to get you to think about negotiation behaviour by getting you todemonstrate it and explain it to someone else.


7/22


7

Assessment Criteria

Following the presentation and discussion your efforts will be assessed according to the followingcriteria:

Did the scenario and handout relate the central models or frameworks for understanding thenegotiation process to the topic?

Did the scenario and handout identify and present practical applications in a way in which theaudience could learn something useful for their future negotiations? Were the major learning points clearly articulated and presented in a way that was easily

understood by the audience? Were the learning points well supported with relevant scholarly and practitioner articles on

negotiation?

Each group will be ranked by the remainder of the class according to the criteria above. This ranking willbe taken into account by the lecturer when the marks for the Thespian exercise are awarded. Note: Themarks awarded to the group for the presentation and handout will be awarded equally to all members ofthe group unless the group itself request an agreed different allocation to the total marks awarded.

In addition (though not part of the final assessment) the remainder of the class will be asked to consider

the extent to which the careers of Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett are under threat from the actingprowess of the group, with Oscar type accolades being awarded.

Not at all = 0; Russell and Cate should quit now = 10

Assessment 2: Individual Learning Journal

The purpose of this assessment is to assess your ability to integrate the theory with the practice ofnegotiation by reflecting on your own and others experiences of negotiation.

Description

Individually write up your own reflections on negotiation theory and practice in a learning journal. Yourlearning journal should include three two page entries. Your journal should record your personalreflection on the core themes and exercises that comprise this unit. The three entries should bestructured as follows:

Entries 1 and 2: Comment on relevant press clippings and magazine articles of actual negotiation casesthat have furthered your understanding of negotiation and that illustrate core themes and topics explored

in this unit. It is expected that your choice of examples will demonstrate your understanding of the majornegotiation frameworks covered in class. The negotiation cases you choose should also not be ones thatwe discuss in class.

Your final entry should describe three key learning points about negotiation that you have learned fromcompleting the unit; and how you will use what you have learned to be a more effective manager in yourworkplace.

There is a limit of six pages (1 1/2 spaced) for this assessment, excluding reference list.


8/22


8

Assessment Criteria

Your paper will be assessed according to the general criteria provided on page 10 and also take intoaccount the extent to which you demonstrate your:

understanding of the underlying concepts and theories of negotiation using real world examples ability to constructively review your own experience and to integrate it with the practice of

strategic negotiation

HD80-100%

D70-79%

CR60-69%

P ass50-59%

Fail49%

demonstrate your understanding ofthe underlying concepts and theoriesof negotiation using two real worldexamples

ability to constructively review yourown experience and to integrate itwith the practice of negotiation

use of relevant readings to support your

analysis and conclusions identification of three key learning points

about negotiation specific example(s) of how learning will

improve effectiveness at work logical structure and presentation

clarity of expression

Harvard referenced

Assessment 3: Self Reflection Exercise

The purpose of this assessment is to focus on your own experience of negotiating, to reflect on whathappened and to develop an action plan to improve your future negotiation skills.

Description

This assignment focuses on your analysis of individual and group negotiation behaviour.

On Day 3 of Summer School you will participate in a group negotiation exercise which will be recorded onvideo. For this assignment you will be required to reflect upon that negotiation and your own participationin it. As part of the review process you should:

Write up your impressions and reflections immediately after the negotiation has concluded Arrange with others in the group to review the video

You are required to write up your experience of the Salary Negotiation conducted during the course underthe four headings below based on Kolbs learning cycle. Please keep the description of the actualexperience to an absolute minimum; write only what is necessary for an analysis of the negotiation itself.Avoid generalities such as 'the negotiations were cooperative', instead concentrate on analysing the detailof strategy and behaviour. References to research should be used to show how you apply research topractice and to support your analysis and conclusions. The active experimentation section should discusswhat you might now do in other negotiations, not simply in a re-run of the negotiation being reviewed. Youwill not be assessed according to the outcome you achieved in the negotiation.


9/22


10/22


10

HD80-100%

D70-79%

CR60-69%

P ass50-59%

Fail49%

1. Concrete experience: What happened? succinct description of key dynamics

in the negotiation2. Reflective observation: What did you

think, feel and observe? identification of helpful/unhelpful

behaviours awareness of own and others

negotiating style awareness of own thoughts, feelings

and behaviour observation of body language

3. Abstract conceptualization: So what? relationship of theory to practice analysis of behaviours and

negotiation processes4. Active experimentation: Now what?

new ways of thinking/behaving

application to other situations development of action plan

5. Knowledge of relevant literature evidence of wide reading use of relevant readings beyond

course materials6. Presentation and structure

organisation and structure grammar, spelling and punctuation Harvard referenced

The Standard of Assessment

The Graduate School must ensure that the processes of assessment are fair and are designed tomaintain the standards of the School and its students. The School follows the University of WesternAustralias grading system.

HD (Higher Distinction) 80-100%D (Distinction) 70-79%CR (credit Pass) 60-69%P (Pass) 50-59%N+ (Fail) 45-49%N (Fail) 0 -44%

The School awards marks leading to these grades by using the following general criteria which arepresented here as an indication of the Schools expectations. These general criteria may besupplemented by specific standards provided with regard to a particular assignment.

HD The student has a clear understanding of theory, concepts and issues relating to the subject andis able to adopt a critical perspective. The student is able to clearly identify the most critical aspectsof the task and is able to offer a logically consistent and well articulated analysis within the analyticalframework presented in the course. The student is able to draw widely from the academic literatureand elsewhere, but maintains relevance.


11/22


11

D The student has a clear understanding of theory, concepts and issues relating to the subject.The student is able to develop an analysis of an issue using the analytic framework presented in thecourse and is able to identify and evaluate the critical issues. The student is able to draw upon relevantacademic and other material.

CR The student demonstrates an understanding of the analytic framework developed in the courseand a partial understanding of concepts and issues. The student is able to identify some key issues and

is able to present a logical discussion, but with some conceptual errors or gaps between analysis andconclusions shortcoming. The student is able to draw upon an adequate range of references and othermaterials.

P The student generally takes a descriptive rather than analytic approach to the subject. Thestudent is able to demonstrate some understanding of the issues involved but does not demonstrate theability to apply the analytical framework which had been developed in the course. Draws primarily uponcourse materials for referencing.

N+ The student is unable to demonstrate that he or she understands the core elements of thesubject matter. The student is able to provide some insight into issues but misapplies analytic frameworkdeveloped in the course, omitting key factors and, for example, drawing conclusions which are notrelated to the preceding discussion.

N The student is unable to demonstrate any understanding of the subject matter. Materialpresented for assessment is unrelated to course framework and shows no effort to identify or addresscritical aspects of the topic.

The scaling of marks to ensure comparability between classes is an acceptable academic practice. TheGSM and Board of Examiners has the right to scale marks where it is considered necessary to maintainconsistency and fairness.

Submission of Assignments

All assignments should be handed in to the Myer Street Reception by 9am on the due date. Studentscan also use the after hours box at the bottom of the stairwell leading to the carpark for submission oftheir assignments over the weekend. This box will be cleared at 9am on the Monday morning.

Late assignments will attract a penalty of 5% per day. This penalty will be waived by the lecturer only inexceptional circumstances. No marks will be awarded to assignments submitted after other students inthe class have had their assignments returned.

Papers of excessive length will also attract a penalty. The penalty will be 5% for each 200 words, or partthereof, over the word limit.

Assignments will be returned in class or through the Business School reception.

It is the intention that the marked assignments will be returned within two weeks of submission.


12/22


12

Ethical Scholarship, Academic Literacy and Academic Misconduct

Ethical Scholarship is the pursuit of scholarly enquiry marked by honesty and integrity.

Academic Literacy is the capacity to undertake study and research, and to communicate findings andknowledge, in a manner appropriate to the particular disciplinary conventions and scholarly standardsexpected at university level.

Academic misconduct is any activity or practice engaged in by a student that breaches explicitguidelines relating to the production of work for assessment, in a manner that compromises or defeatsthe purpose of that assessment. Students must not engage in academic misconduct. Any suchactivity undermines an ethos of ethical scholarship. Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited tocheating, or attempting to cheat, through:

collusion inappropriate collaboration plagiarism (see more details below) misrepresenting or fabricating data or results or other assessable work inappropriate electronic data sourcing/collection breaching rules specified for the conduct of examinations in a way that may compromise or

defeat the purposes of assessment.

Penalties for academic misconduct vary according to seriousness of the case, and may include therequirement to do further work or repeat work; deduction of marks; the award of zero marks for theassessment; failure of one or more units; suspension from a course of study; exclusion from theUniversity; non-conferral of a degree, diploma or other award to which the student would otherwise havebeen entitled. Refer to the Ethical Scholarship, Academic Literacy and Academic Misconduct andindividual Faculty policies. For further information on the rules and procedures in respect of appropriateacademic conduct you should visit: http://www.teachingandlearning.uwa.edu.au/tl/academic conduct

Acknowledgements of Plagiarism

In the course of your individual and group work assignments, you will encounter ideas from manysources. These will include journal and newspaper articles, commentaries, books, web sites and otherelectronic sources, original case sources, lecture materials. All MBA assignments that you submit mustacknowledge all the different sources you have used. Not to acknowledge your sources is plagiarism, aform of dishonesty. Plagiarism is the misappropriation of the work or ideas of others and presentingthem as your own. This is reprehensible from both an ethical and legal viewpoint. Neither the Schoolnor the University accepts ignorance or the fact that a students previous acts of plagiarism had beenundetected as a defense.

In order to avoid engaging in plagiarism it is your responsibility to acknowledge all of your sources in anywork submitted for assessment and it is essential that you reference the work of others correctly. Whereyou quote directly from a source, you must ensure that any direct quotations are placed in quotation

marks and are fully referenced. Even when you do not quote directly and are just referring to orexpanding on the work of others, you must still acknowledge the sources of your information and ideas.Close paraphrasing in which you change a few phrases around, leave a clause out of a long sentence orput the original sentences in a different order is still plagiarism. To mark words as a quotation the entiretext that has been copied should be enclosed within the quotation marks. If the copied text is four ormore lines in length, it may be more appropriate to set it as a separate and indented paragraph. Eachtime that text is copied, the source must be acknowledged with a reference citation, including the pagenumber.

Advice on proper referencing is given below. If you have any doubts concerning appropriate referencingformats or how to acknowledge the work of others correctly, you should seek the advice of your lecturer.


13/22


13

Referencing

It is important that the referencing of any sources used in your written work is done properly, if only tosubstantiate the points you are making in your assignment or project. The Harvard style is the preferredand there are some notes for guidance which have been prepared by the library staff: iting yourSources Harvard Style

http://www.library.uwa.edu.au/guides/citingsources/harvard.html

EndNote is a really good system for building up a database of references. Not everyone will want toinvest the time in using this system but you should consider it if you intend to build up resource materialsor plan to undertake extensive research in a particular area. The library staff have also developed atutoring package: Quick Guide to Using EndNote which provides the basics for using EndNote with anessayhttp://www.library.uwa.edu.au/guides/endnote/quick_endnote.pdf

This is linked to the How to UseEndNote page www.library.uwa.edu.au/guides/endnote/which providesmore comprehensive information.

Taping of LecturesThe Graduate School does not provide tape recordings of lectures, however if you do wish to tape recorda lecture, then as a matter of courtesy you should obtain the permission of the lecturer first.

Appeals against Academic Assessment

In the first instance, students are strongly advised to talk informally to the lecturer about the gradeawarded. The University provides the opportunity for students to lodge an appeal against any markwhich he or she feels is unfair. Any student making an appeal is under an obligation to establish a primafacie case by providing particular and substantial reasons for the appeal.

There is a 12 day time limit for making any such appeal. An appeal against academic assessment may

result, as appropriate, in an increase or decrease in the mark originally awarded. The Universityregulations relating to appeals and the form on which the appeal should be lodged can be found in theGSM website or athttp://www.publishing.uwa.edu.au/handbooks/interfaculty/PFAAAA.html

Attendance

Participation in class, whether it be listening to a lecture or getting involved in other activities, is animportant part of the learning process. For this reason the GSM has decided not to move to on-lineteaching. It is, therefore, important that you attend classes (and be on time).

More formally, the University regulations state that to complete a course or unit, students shall attendprescribed classes, lectures, seminars and tutorials. Students should not expect to obtain approval tomiss more than two classes per unit, unless there are exceptional circumstances.


14/22


14

UNIT STRUCTURE AND SEMINAR TOPICS

D A Y O N E 8:30 10:30 am Session 1: Getting started: What is negotiation?

Conflict handling styles.

Text reading: Lewicki et al. 2007 Ch 1Supplementary Readings: Deutsch 1990; Shell2001; Sorenson et al. 1999;

10:30 10:45 am Morning Tea/Coffee

10:45 12:30 pm Session 1 cont: The nature of negotiation

Text reading : Lewicki et al. 2007 Ch 1;

Exercise : The Petrol Pricing Exercise

12:30 1:15 pm Lunch

1:15 3:00 pm Session 2: Distributive bargaining

Text Reading : Lewicki et al 2007 Ch 2

Supplementary Readings : Rubin, Pruitt and Kim1994 Chs 4; Watkins 2001 ;

3:00 3:15 pm Afternoon Tea/Coffee

3:15 4:30 pm Session 2 cont: Distributive bargaining cont

Exercise : The Book Deal


15/22

15

D A Y T W O D A Y T8:30 10:30 am Session 3: Integrative negotiation

Text reading : Lewicki et al 2007 Ch 3Supplementary readings : Fisher, Ury and Patton

1991 ; Lax and Sebenius 1986 ; Walton andMcKersie 1965 pp 126-160 ;

Video : Negotiating Corporate Change

8:30 10:30 am Session 5: How

Text Reading: LeSupplementary R

Rackman and Cand Caldwell 2002004; Simons an

Exercise: Active

10:30 10:45 am Morning Tea/Coffee 10:30 10:45 am Morning Tea/Co

10:45 12:30 pm Session 3 cont: Interest-based approaches tonegotiation

Text Reading : Lewicki et al 2003 ch 3 ;Supplementary Readings : Fisher, Ury & Patton,1991 ; Thompson and Leonardelli, 2004 ;

Exercise : Island Cruise

10:45 12:30 pm Session 5 cont:

Text Reading : L

Video: Inside Sto

12:30 1:15 pm Lunch 12:30 1:15 pm Lunch

1:15 3:00 pm Session 4: Strategic Choice

Text Reading: Lewicki et al. 2007 Ch 4Supplementary Readings : Allred 2000 ; Douglas1957; Fells 2000 ; Pruitt 1983; Putnam 1990 ;Sorenson et al 1999 ; Olekalns et al. 1996; Weingartand Olekalns 2004;

1:15 3:00 pm Session 6: Video

Salary Negotiatio

Groups 4, 5 and

3:00 3:15 pm Afternoon Tea/Coffee 3:00 3:15 pm Afternoon Tea/C

3:15 4:30 pm Session 4 cont: Strategic Choice cont

Exercise : EuroTechnologies cont

3:15 4:30 pm Session 6 cont:

Salary Negotiatio

Groups 1, 2 and


16/22

16

D A Y F O U R D AY8:30 10:30 am Session 7: Communication, Emotions & Cognitive

Biases in Negotiation

Text Reading : Lewicki et al 2003 Chs 5, 10 ;Supplementary Readings : Allred et al 1007 ; Barry1999 ; Bazerman and Neale 1992 ; Brett et al 1998 ;et al. 2000 ; Kramer et al 1993 ; Morley andStephenson 1977 ; Ogilvie and Carsky 2002 ;

8:30 10:30 am Session 9: Med

Supplementary

Exercise: Levve

10:30 10:45 am Morning Tea/Coffee 10:30 10:45 am Morning Tea/C

10:45 12:30 pm Session 7 cont: Ethics and negotiation

Text Reading: Lewicki et al 2007 Ch 9

10:45 12:30 pm Session 9 cont:and Presentatio

12:30 1:15 pm Lunch 12:30 1:15 pm Lunch

1:15 3:00 pm Session 8: Negotiating in Other Contexts

Text Reading : Lewicki et al 2007 Ch 16 ;

Supplementary Readings : Brett et al 1998 ; Graham1996 ; Salacuse 1998 ; Sebenius 2002 ; Schuster andCopeland 1996 Chs 1,2 ;

Video : Mustang Jeans

1:15 3:00 pm Session 10: The

3:00 3:15 pm Afternoon Tea/Coffee 3:00 3:15 pm Afternoon Tea/

3:15 4:30 pm Session 8 cont: Negotiating in other contexts

Exercise: Bacchus Winery

3:15 4:30 pm Session 10 con

Text Reading: L


17/22


17

REFERENCE LIST

MODELS OF NEGOTIATION: Primary sources and related reading

( in the readings)

Allred, K.G. (2000) Distinguishing Best and Strategic Practices: A Framework for Managing

the Dilemma between Creating and Claiming Value Negotiation Journal 16(4) pp.387-397.Axelrod, R. (1990) The Evolution of Cooperation Harmondsworth, Mddx., Penguin Books.Bazerman, M.H. and Neale, M.A. (1992) Negotiating Rationally New York, Free Press.Deutsch, M. (1973) The Resolution of Conflict New Haven, Yale University Press.Douglas, A. (1957) 'The Peaceful Settlement of Industrial and Intergroup Disputes' Journal of

Conflict Resolution 1 pp.69-81.Douglas, A. (1962) Industrial Peacemaking New York, Columbia University Press.Fells, R.E. (1983) Movement, Phases and Deadlocks MIR Thesis, University of Western

Australia, published in 1986 by IRRC, Monograph No.12, University of New South Wales.Fells, R.E. (1993) Developing Trust in Negotiation Employee Relations 15(1) pp.33-45.Fells. R.E. (1998) 'Overcoming the Dilemmas in Walton and McKersie's Mixed Bargaining

Strategy' Relations Industrielles 53(2) pp.300-322.Fells, R.E. (2000a) Negotiating strategically in Travaglione, A. and Marshall, V. (eds.) Human

Resource Strategies: An Applied Approach Sydney, McGraw-Hill, pp.81-116.Fells, R.E. (2000b) Labour-Management Negotiation. Some Insights into Strategy and

Language Relations Industrielles 55(4) pp.583-603.Fisher, R (1983) Negotiating Power American Behavioral Scientist 27, pp149-166.Fisher, R and Ertel, D. (1995) Getting Ready to Negotiate New York, Penguin.Fisher, R., Ury, W. and Patton, B. (1991) Getting To Yes London, Hutchinson.Holmes, M.E. (1992) Phase Structures in Negotiation in Putnam, L.L. and Roloff, M.E. (eds)

Communication and Negotiation Newbury Park, Sage Publications, pp.83-105.Kniveton, B. (1989) The Psychology of Bargaining Aldershot, Hants., Avebury.Lax, D.A. and Sebenius, J.K. (1985) The Power of Alternatives or the Limits to Negotiation

Negotiation Journal 1, pp.163-179.Lax, D.A. and Sebenius, J.K. (1986) The Manager as a Negotiator New York, Free Press.Lewicki, R.J., Hiam, A. and Olander, K.W. (1996) Think Before You Speak New York, John Wiley

and Son.Magenau, J.M. and Pruitt, D.G. (1979) 'The Social Psychology of Bargaining: A Theoretical

Synthesis' in Stephenson, G.M. and Brotherton, C.J. (eds) Industrial Relations: A SocialPsychological Approach Chichester, John Wiley and Sons, pp.181-210.

Marsh, P.D.V. (1981) Contract Negotiator's Handbook Aldershot, Hants., Gower.Mnoonkin, R.H., Peppet, S.R. and Tulumello, A.S. (2000) Beyond Winning Harvard University

Press, Cambridge, Mass.Morley, I.E. and Stephenson, G.M. (1977) The Social Psychology of Bargaining London, George

Allen and Unwin.Peterson, R. B. and Tracy, L. N. (1976) 'A Behavioral Model of Problem-Solving in Labour

Negotiations', British Journal of Industrial Relations 14, pp.159-173.Pruitt, D.G. (1981) Negotiation Behavior New York, Academic Press.Pruitt, D.G. (1983) 'Strategic Choice in Negotiation' American Behavioral Scientist 27(2)

pp.167-194.Pruitt, D.G. and Carnevale, P.J. (1993) Negotiation in Social Conflict Buckingham, Open

University Press.Putnam, L.L. (1990) Reframing Integrative and Distributive Bargaining: A Process Perspective

in Sheppard, B.L., Bazerman, M.H. and Lewicki, R.J. (eds) Research on Negotiations inOrganizations Greenwich, Conn., JAI Press, pp.3-30.

Putnam, L.L. and Roloff, M.E. (1992) Communication and Negotiation Sage Annual Reviews ofCommunication Research, Volume 20, Beverly Hills, Sage Publications.

Raiffa, H. (1982) The Art and Science of Negotiation Cambridge, Mass., Harvard UniversityPress.


18/22


18

Rhoades, J.A. and Carnevale, P.J. (1999) The Behavioral Context of Strategic Choice inNegotiation: A Test of the Dual Concerns Model Journal of Applied Social Psychology 29(9)pp.1777-1802.

Rojot, J. (1991) Negotiation: From Theory to Practice London, Macmillan.Rubin, J.Z., Pruitt, D.G. and Kim, S.H. (1994) Social ConflictNew York, McGraw Hill.Schuster, C. and Copeland M. (1996) Global Business Fort Worth, Texas, Dryden Press.Sorenson, R.L., Morse, E.A. and Savage, G.T. (1999) A Test of the Motivations Underlying

Choice of Conflict Strategies in the Dual-Concerns Model International Journal of Conflict

Management 10(1) pp.25-44.Thompson, L. (1998) The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator Upper Saddle River, NJ., Prentice

Hall.Walton, R.E. and McKersie, R.B. (1965 or 1991) A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations New

York, McGraw-Hill.Warr, P. (1973) Psychology and Collective Bargaining London, Hutchinson.Watkins, M. (1999) Negotiating in a Complex World Negotiation Journal 15(3) pp.245-270.Watkins, M (2002) Breakthrough Business Negotiation Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

NEGOTIATION AND NEGOTIATON STYLES: General readings

Albin, C (1993) The Role of Fairness in Negotiation Negotiation Journal 9(3) pp.223-244.Ancona, D.G., Friedman, R.A. and Kolb, D.M. (1991) The Group and What Happens on the Way

to Yes Negotiation Journal 7(2) pp.155-173.Andes, R.H. (1992) Message Dimensions of Negotiation Negotiation Journal 8(2) pp.125-130.Brett, J.F., Northcraft, G.B. and Pinkley, R.L. (1999) 'Stairways to Heaven: an Interlocking Self-

Regulation Model of Negotiation' Academy of Management Review 24, 435-451.Craver, C.B. (2003) Negotiation Styles: The Impact on Bargaining Transactions Dispute

Resolution Journal February/April pp48-55.Downie, B.M. (1991) When Negotiations Fail: Causes of Breakdown and Tactics for Breaking

the Stalemate Negotiation Journal 7(2) pp.175-186.Fells, R.E. (1995) Enterprise Bargaining and the Process of Negotiation Journal of Industrial

Relations 37, pp.218-235.Fells. R.E. (1996) Preparation for Negotiation: Issue and Process Personnel Review 25(2)

pp.50-60.

Fells, R.E. (1996) Negotiating Workplace Change: An Overview of Research into NegotiationBehaviour in Mortimer, D., Leece, P. and Morris, R. (eds) Workplace Reform and EnterpriseBargaining Harcourt Brace, Sydney, pp.327-345.

Fisher, R. (1989) 'Negotiating Inside Out: What Are the Best Ways to Relate InternalNegotiations with External Ones?' Negotiation Journal 5(1) pp.33-42.

Fisher, R. and Davis, W.H. (1987) Six Basic Interpersonal Skills for a Negotiators RepertoireNegotiation Journal 3, pp.117-122.

Friedman, R.A. (1994) Front Stage Backstage Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.Galasinski, D. (1996) Pretending to Cooperate. How Speakers Hide Evasive Actions

Argumentation 10, pp.315-388.Graham, J. (1996) Vis--vis International Business Negotiations in Ghaauri, P.N. and Usunier,

P. (eds) International Business Negotiations Oxford, Pergamon, pp.69-90.Honey, P. (1990) Face to Face Skills Aldershot, Hants., Gower.

Lax, D.A. and Sebenius, J.K. (1991) Negotiating Through An Agent Journal of ConflictResolution 35, pp.474-493.Lax, D.A. and Sebenius, J.K. (2002) Dealcrafting: The Substance of Three-Dimensional

Negotiations Negotiation Journal 18(1) pp.5-28.Mayer, B. (2000) The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Mnookin, R.H. and Susskind, L.E. (eds)(1999) Negotiating on Behalf of Others Thousand Oaks,

Calif, Sage.Ogilvie, J.R. and Carsky, M.L. (2002) Building Emotional Intelligence in Negotiations

International Journal of Conflict Management 13, pp.381-400.Rackman, N. and Carlisle, J. (1978) The Effective NegotiatorParts 1 and 2, Journal of

European Industrial Training Part 1:2(6) pp.6-11; Part 2:2(7) pp. 2-5.


19/22


19

Roloff, M.J. and Jordon, J.M. (1991) The Influence of Effort, Experience, and Persistence on theElements of Bargaining Plans Communication Research 18, pp.306-332.

Salacuse, J.W. (1998) Ten Ways that Culture Affects Negotiating Style: Some Survey ResultsNegotiation Journal 14(3) pp.221-240.

Schneider, A.K. (1994) Effective Responses to Offensive Comments Negotiation Journal 10(2)pp.107-115.

Sebenius, J.K. (2001) Six Habits of Merely Effective Negotiators Harvard Business ReviewApril, pp.87-95.

Sebenius, J.K. (2002) The Hidden Challenge of Cross-Border Negotiations Harvard BusinessReview March, pp.76-85.

Sebenius, J.K. (2002) Caveats for the Cross-Border Negotiators Negotiation Journal 18(2)pp.121.133.

Shell, G. R. (2001) Bargaining Styles and Negotiation: The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict ModeInstrument Negotiation Journal 17(2) pp 155-174.

Schuster, C. and Copeland, M. (1996) Culture Classification Model Global Business FortWorth Tx, Dryden Press

Spegel, N.M., Rogers, B. and Buckley, R.P. (1998) Negotiation Theory and Techniques Sydney,Butterworths

Stark, P.B. and Flaherty, J. (2004) How to Negotiate Training and Development June pp. 52-54.Walters, A.E., Stuhlmacher, A.F. and Meyer, L.L. (1998) 'Gender and Negotiator

Competitiveness: A Meta-analysis' Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes76, pp.1-29.

Watkins, M. (2001) Principles of Persuasion Negotiation Journal 17(2) pp.115-137.

NEGOTIATION BEHAVIOUR: Selected Experimental Research

Allred, K. G., Mallozzi, J. S., Matsui, F., and Raia, C. P. (1997) The Influence of Anger andCompassion on Negotiation Performance Organizational Behaviour and Human DecisionProcesses 70 pp. 175-187.

Axelrod, R. (1980) More Effective Choice in the Prisoner's Dilemma Journal of ConflictResolution 24, pp.379-403.

Bolton, G.E., Chatterjee, K. and McGinn, K.L. (2003) How Communication Links InfluenceCoalition Bargaining: A Laboratory Investigation Management Science 49(5) pp 583-598.

Brett, J.M., Adair, W., Lempereur, A., Okumura, T., Shikhirev, P, Tinsley, C. and Lytle, A.(1998) Culture and Joint Gains in Negotiation Negotiation Journal 14(1) pp.61-86.Brett, J.M., Shapiro, D.L. and Lytle, A.L. (1998) Breaking the Bonds of Reciprocity in

Negotiations Academy of Management Journal 14, pp.410-424.Carnevale, P.J.D., and Lawler, E.J. (1986) 'Time Pressure and the Development of Integrative

Agreements in Bilateral Negotiation' Journal of Conflict Resolution 30(4) pp.636-659.Carnevale, P.J.D., Pruitt, D.G. and Seilheiner, S. (1981) 'Looking and Competing: Accountability

and Visual Access in Integrative Bargaining' Journal of Personality and Social Psychology40, pp.111-120.

De Dreu, c. K., Carnevale, P. J., Emans, B.J. and van de Vliert, E. (1994) Effects of Gain-LossFrames in Negotiation: Loss Aversion, Mismatching, and Frame Adoption OrganizationalBehavior and Human Decision Processes 60 pp. 90-107.

De Dreu, C. K., Koole, S. L. and Steinel, W. (2000) Unfixing the Fixed Pie: A Motivated

Information Processing Approach to Integrative Negotiation Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology 79 pp. 975-987.Duane, M.J., Azevedo, R.G. and Anderson, U. (1985) 'Behaviour as an Indication of an

Opponent's Intentions in Collective Negotiation' Psychological Reports 57, pp.507-513.Esser, J.K., and Komorita, S.S. (1975) 'Reciprocity and Concession Making in Bargaining'

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, pp.864-872.Gelfand, M.J. and Christakopoulou, S. (1999) Culture and Negotiator Cognition: Judgment

Accuracy and Negotiation Processes in Individualistic and Collectivistic CulturesOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 79(3) pp.248-269.

Gordon, M.G., Schmitt, N. and Schneider, W.G. (1984) 'Laboratory Research on Bargaining andNegotiation: An Evaluation' Industrial Relations 23(2) pp.218-233.


20/22


20

Gruder, C.L. and Duslak, R.J. (1973) 'Elicitation of Co-operation by Retaliatory and Non-Retaliatory Strategies in a Mixed Motive Game' Journal of Conflict Resolution 17(1) pp.162-174.

Hamner, W.C. (1974) 'Effects of Bargaining Strategy and Pressure to Reach Agreement in aStalemate Negotiation' Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30, pp.458-467.

Harinck, F., De Dreu, C. K. and Van Vienen, A. E. (2000) The Impact of Conflict Issues on FixedPie Perceptions, Problem Solving, and Integrative Outcomes in Negotiation OrganizationalBehavior and Human Decision Processes 81 pp. 329-358.

Jackson, C.N. and King, D.C. (1983) 'The Effects of Representatives' Power Within TheirOrganisations on the Outcome of a Negotiation' Academy of Management Journal 26(1)pp.178-185.

Keating, M.E., Pruitt, D.G., Eberle, R.A. and Mikolic, J.M. (1994) Strategic Choice in EverydayDisputes International Journal of Conflict Management 5(2) pp.143-157

Kemp, K.E. and Smith, W.P. (1994) Information Exchange, Toughness and IntegrativeBargaining: The Roles of Explicit Cues and Perspective Taking International Journal ofConflict Management 5(1) pp.5-21.

Klimoski, R.J. (1972), 'The Effects of Intragroup Forces on Intergroup Conflict Resolution'Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance 8, pp.363-383.

Komorita, S.S. and Barnes, M. (1969) 'Effects of Pressures to Reach Agreement in Bargaining'Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 13(3) pp.245-252.

Kramer, R., Newton, E. and Pommerenke, P. (1993) Self Enhancement Biases and NegotiatorJudgment: Effects of Self-Esteem and Mood Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses 56 pp. 110-33.

Lamunde, K.G. and Scudder, J. (1993) Compliance-Gaining Techniques of Type A ManagersJournal of Business Communication 30(1) pp.63-79.

Lindskold, S., Betz, B. and Walters, P.S. (1986) 'Transforming Competitive or Co-operativeClimates' Journal of Conflict Resolution 30(1) pp.99-114.

Maddux, W. W., Mullen, E. and Galinsky, A. D. (2008) Chameleons Bake Bigger Pies and TakeBigger Pieces: Strategic Behavioral Mimicry Facilitates Negotiation Outcomes Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology 44 pp. 461-468

Mosterd, I. and Rutte, C.G. (2000) Effects of Time Pressure and Accountability to Constituentson Negotiation International Journal of Conflict Management 11, pp.227-247.

Murningham, J.K., Babcock, L., Thompson, L. and Pillutla, M. (1999) 'The Information Dilemma

in Negotiations: Effects of Experience, Incentives and Integrative Potential' InternationalJournal of Conflict Resolution 10, pp.313-339.Nauta, A. and Sangers, K. (2000) 'Interdepartmental Negotiation Behavior in Manufacturing'

International Journal of Conflict Management 11(2), pp.135-161.Neale, M.A. and Bazerman, M.H. (1985) 'The Effect of Externally Set Goals on Reaching

Integrative Agreements in Competitive Markets' Journal of Occupational Behavior 6, pp.19-32.

Neale, M.A. and Bazerman, M.H. (1985) 'The Effects of Framing and Negotiator Overconfidenceon Bargaining Behaviors and Outcomes' Academy of Management Journal 28(1) pp. 34-49.

Olekalns, M., Smith, P.L. and Walsh, T. (1996) The Process of Negotiating: Strategy and Timingas Predictors of Outcomes Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68,pp.68-77.

Patchen, M. (1987) Strategies for Eliciting Co-operation from an Adversary' Journal of Conflict

Resolution 31(1) pp.164-185.Pinkley, R.L., Griffith, T. L., and Northcraft, G. B. (1995) Fixed Pie a la Mode: InformationAvailability, Information Processing, and the Negotiation of Suboptimal Agreements,Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 101-112.

Pruitt, D.G. (1983) 'Achieving Integrative Agreements', in Bazerman M.H. and Lewicki R. J.,(eds) Negotiation in Organizations Beverly Hills, Sage Publications, pp.35-50.

Purdy, J.M., Nye, P. and Balakrishnan, P.V. (2000) 'The Impact of Communication Media onNegotiation Outcomes' International Journal of Conflict Management 11(2), pp 162-187.

Rahim, M. A. (1983) A Measure of Styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict Academy ofManagement Journal 26, pp 368-376.


21/22


21

Schei, V. and Rognes, J.K. (2003) Knowing Me, Knowing You: Own Orientation and Informationabout the Opponents Orientation in Negotiation, The International Journal of ConflictManagement 14(1), pp. 43-59.

Schroth, H. A., Bain-Chekal, J. and Caldwell, D. F. (2005) Sticks and Stones may Break Bonesand Words can Hurt Me: Words and Phrases that Trigger Emotions in Negotiations andTheir Effects The International Journal of Conflict Management 16(2) pp. 102-127

Schweitzer, M. E. and Croson, R. (1999) Curtailing Deception: The Impact of Direct Questionson Lies and Omissions The International Journal of Conflict Management 10(3) pp. 225-248

Steinel, W., Van Kleef, G. A. and Harinck, F. (2008) Are You Talking to Me?! Separting thePeople from the Problem When Expressing Emotions in Negotiation Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology 44 pp. 362-369

Tedeschi, J.T. and Bonoma, T.V. (1977) Measures of Last Resort: Coercion and Aggression inThompson, L. (1993) The Impact of Negotiation in Intergroup Relations Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology 29, pp.304-325.

Wall, J.A. (1977) 'Operant Conditioning and Negotiator's Concession Making' Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology 13, pp.431-440.

Weingart, L.R., Thompson, L.L., Bazerman, M.H. and Carroll, J.S. (1990) Tactical Behaviourand Negotiation Outcomes International Journal of Conflict Management 1, pp.7-31.

REVIEWS of Research in Negotiation

Barry, B. (1999) The Tactical Use of Emotion in Negotiation. In R. Bies, R. J. Lewicki and B. H.Sheppard (Eds.) Research on Negotiations in Organizations (Vol. 7, pp 97-121), Stamford,CT: JAI Press.

Bazerman, M. H. and Lewicki, R. J. (eds)(1983) Negotiating in Organizations Beverly Hills, SagePublications.

Carnevale, P.J. and Pruitt. D.C. (1992) 'Negotiation and Mediation' Annual Review of Psychology43, pp.531-582.

Deutsch, M. (1990) Sixty Years of Conflict International Journal of Conflict Management 1,pp.237-263.

Druckman, D. (ed)(1977) Negotiations Beverly Hills, Sage Publications.Kumar, R. (1997) The Role of Affect in Negotiations: An Integrative Overview Journal of Applied

Behavioral Science 3(1) pp. 84-100.Lewicki, R.J., Weiss, S.E. and Lewin, D. (1992) Models of Conflict, Negotiation and Third PartyIntervention: A Review and Synthesis Journal of Organizational Behavior 13, pp.209-252.

Murray, J.S. (1986) 'Understanding Competing Theories of Negotiation' Negotiation Journal 2(2)pp.179-186.

Neale, M.A. and Bazerman, M.H. (1985) 'Perspectives for Understanding Negotiation' Journal ofConflict Resolution 29, pp.33-55.

Rubin, J. Z. and Brown, B. R. (1975) The Social Pschology of Bargaining and Negotiation NewYork: Academic Press.

Rubin, J.Z. (1983) Negotiation: An Introduction of Some Issues and Themes AmericanBehavioral Scientist 27(2) pp.135-147.

Sawyer, J. and Guetzkow, H. (1974) The Process of Negotiation in Brinkman, P. (ed) SocialConflict Lexington, Mass. D.C. Heath, pp. 146-161.

Spector, P. (2004) An Interview with Roger Fisher and William Ury Academy of ManagementExecutive 18(3) pp. 101-108.Thomas, K. (1976) 'Conflict and Conflict Management' in Dunnette, M. D. (ed) Handbook of

Industrial and Organizational Psychology Chicago, Rand McNally, pp.889-935.Thompson, L. and Leonardelli, G. J. (2004) The Big Bang: The Evolution of Negotiation

Research Academy of Management Executive 18(3) pp. 113-117.Zartman, I. W. (1988) 'Common Elements in the Analysis of the Negotiation Process' Negotiation

Journal 4(1) pp.31-44.Also, several volumes of Research on Negotiation in Organizations Greenwich, Conn., JAI

Press, usually edited by Bazerman, Lewicki and Sheppard (though the principal editorchanges each edition)


22/22


22

MEDIATION: Some useful sources

Agusti-Panareda, J. (2004) Power Imbalances in Mediation: Questioning some CommonAssumptions Dispute Resolution Journal May/July pp. 24-31.

Blitman, B. and Maes, J. (2004) Visioning and Coaching Techniques in Mediation DisputeResolution Journal May/July pp 20-23.

Boulle, L. (1996) Mediation Sydney, Butterworths.

Bush, R.A. (1999) What do we need mediators for?: Mediations Value-added for Negotiatorsin Lewicki, R.J., Saunders D.M. and Minton, J.W. (1999) Negotiation, Readings, Exercisesand Cases Boston, Irwin McGraw-Hill, pp.429-457.

Carnevale, P. (1986) 'Strategic Choice in Mediation' Negotiation Journal 2(1) pp.41-56.Fells, R.E. (2000c) 'Of Models and Journeys: Keeping Negotiation and Mediation on Track'

Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 11(4), pp.209-219.Kressel, K. and Pruitt, D.G. (eds)(1989) Mediation Research San Francisco, Jossey Bass.Wade, J.H. (1994) 'Strategic Interventions used by Mediators, Facilitators and Conciliators'

Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 9(4), pp.292-304.

Microsoft Word - Mgmt8647 Negotiation Behaviour

Documents

Transcript of Microsoft Word - Mgmt8647 Negotiation Behaviour