Relational business negotiation – propositions based on an interactional perspective

Abstract

Purpose Historically, a transactional perspective has dominated the business negotiation literature. This perspective includes the notions that business negotiations are a linear process that follows episodic or stage models, business negotiations are geared toward an outcome in the form of a one-time transaction, business negotiations focus on a single negotiator or negotiation in a dyad and the research has historically viewed negotiation as a “zero-sum” game. Inspired by a long tradition of empirical studies of business relationships, there is good reason to apply a conceptual analysis to challenge these four assumptions and propose an alternative view on the negotiation process. The purpose of this paper is to contrast how aspects of business negotiations are commonly conceptualized with the industrial marketing and purchasing (IMP) perspective and develop propositions that will contribute to future research by offering guidelines for the development of business negotiation literature. Design/methodology/approach To contribute to a discussion on the relation between conceptualization and research results, definitions within the existing literature regarding business negotiation are contrasted with similar definitions of concepts from the IMP perspective. Findings Four propositions have been formulated that further the conceptual understanding of business negotiation. Moreover, a need for future methodological deliberations is demonstrated, and suggestions for future research in the field are offered. Originality/value Introducing a relational perspective into the conceptually rather underdeveloped stream of research would help to develop the existing critique within the business negotiation literature of its transactional, linear and dyadic focus.

Time for change? Scenario analysis on buyer–seller negotiations

“…The negotiation content summarizes factors that characterize the respective negotiation and determine its degree of complexity and difficulty (Agndal et al , 2017; Bercovitch and Jackson, 2001). The negotiation outcome as one factor of this dimension is often characterized by economic variables such as price and profit, but in recent years integrative outcome components and potentials have been better recognized (Eklinder-Frick and Åge, 2020). The negotiation context describes the setting in which a negotiation takes place and includes the cultural context as well as the negotiation duration and its digital infrastructure, i.e.…”

“…Therefore, futures studies are required for buyer–seller negotiations to examine next to social and economic aspects the external conditions that interact with and influence business decisions and thus negotiations. Particularly, negotiators face the challenges of dynamic environmental changes and a rising complexity (Eklinder-Frick and Åge, 2020; Fells et al , 2015; Laubert and Geiger, 2018), which can occur because of a high amount of available information (Hunter and Goebel, 2008; Ingram, 2004), an increase in technological difficulty (Wengler et al , 2021) and a change in customer needs and demands (Adolph et al , 2014; Schmitz and Ganesan, 2014; Zhang et al , 2019). To prepare negotiation management for this fast-changing environment and handle possible consequences to adjust to, comprehensive development paths are needed.…”

Analysis of Suggestions for Fresh Graduates on Negotiation and Communication Skills

“…Therefore, graduates need always to keep their minds sharp and clear, not to be confused by appearances, and avoid making decisions in a panic and on impulse. This helps to see the depth of the problem, get to the root of the problem, and make communication have the desired effect [7].…”

“…For graduates, listening and communicating are equally important when negotiating. A good listener tends to accumulate more experience and can learn from other people's speeches, conversations, and communication rather than blindly standing still and forcing others to accept their ideas with endless chatter [7]. Distributive negotiation is about compromise and acceptance, emphasizing the BATNA (Best Alternative to a negotiated agreement) in negotiation, as not all negotiations end in a win-win situation.…”

Structural networks and dyadic negotiations in tourism destination ecosystems

“…In hospitality and tourism research, this has been related to spatial planning (Almeida et al , 2017), community-based tourism (Curcija et al , 2019) and relational aspects promoting business cooperation at a destination (Czernek-Marszałek, 2021). As destination firms interact, network structures form (Elvekrok et al , 2022), but the consequences of this structural embeddedness for negotiation behavior are vastly under-investigated (Almeida et al , 2017; Curcija et al , 2019; Eklinder-Frick and Åge, 2020; Geiger et al , 2022). We respond to this research gap by considering destination ecosystems and by addressing how the interfirm networks that embed a dyad affect its negotiation behaviors.…”