NCJ Number
100034
Journal
American Behavioral Scientist Volume: 27 Issue: 2 Dated: (November-December 1983) Pages: 167-194
Date Published
1983
Length
28 pages
Annotation
This paper analyzes four basic negotiating strategies along with the outcomes they encourage and the determinants of their use; guidelines are also provided for influencing the other party's choice of negotiating strategy.
Abstract
Negotiation strategies include (1) problemsolving, an effort to find an alternative acceptable to both parties; (2) contending, attempt to force one's will on the other party; (3) yielding, an act to reduce one's basic aspirations; and (4) inaction, a conscious effort to do as little as possible in negotiation. The problemsolving strategy generally benefits both parties. An unalterable contending strategy undermines a mutually beneficial outcome but can contribute to effective problemsolving by helping set realistic expectations for problemsolving. Yielding by both parties can facilitate problemsolving. Inaction, on the other hand, makes no contribution to a successful negotiation outcome. A negotiator's choice among the four strategies is explained by the 'dual concern' model, which traces the choice to the relative strength of concern about one's own and the other party's outcomes. The choice may also be explained by a party's perception of the feasibility and cost of enacting the various strategies. A reasonable goal in trying to influence the other party's choice of strategy is to win the other party away from contending and inaction toward problemsolving. This may be done by setting an example of problemsolving and encouraging the other party to be concerned about outcomes. 44 references.