NCJ Number
100036
Journal
American Behavioral Scientist Volume: 27 Issue: 2 Dated: (November-December 1983) Pages: 211-228
Date Published
1983
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This article describes five deviations from rationality that mar negotiator judgment and suggests that attention to such deviations be included in negotiator training and be integrated with prescriptive research on negotiation techniques.
Abstract
Eliminating deficient patterns in negotiator judgment is necessary before the negotiator is free to comply with advice derived from prescriptive research. One such deficiency is the framing of negotiation issues in negative language such that the parties are more aware of potential losses than potential gains. Another deficiency in judgment is the assumption that what one party gains the other loses. Mutual gains appropriate for the differing needs of the parties should be the negotiation aim. A nonrational escalation of conflict is also deficient judgment. Negotiators must be careful not to make an irreversible commitment to a 'no-win' position. Negotiators must also guard against overconfidence in achieving the other party's compliance without compromise. Finally, negotiators must guard against the 'winner's curse' which involves having second thoughts about one's proposal when the other party immediately accepts it. This can be remedied by thorough appraisals of one's proposals before they are offered. The concluding section suggests a process for changing deficient judgment patterns. Twenty-six references are listed.