The MARS Approach in the Verbal and Holistic Evaluation of the Negotiation Template

Abstract

The negotiation template, which defines a set of potential negotiation offers, is traditionally evaluated by means of the simple additive weighting method (SAW). However, some recent research reports on the potential problems and inconsistencies in using and interpreting SAW-based scores. Thus, in this paper we consider the issue of evaluating negotiation offers when the negotiator's preferences are expressed verbally. We present a new approach called Measuring Attractiveness near Reference Situations (MARS), which combines the algorithms of two multiple criteria decision making methods: ZAPROS and MACBETH. Applying the elements of ZAPROS allows identifying a small set of reference alternatives that consists of the best resolution levels for all the negotiation issues but one. In pair-wise comparisons of these alternatives negotiators need to evaluate trade-offs only, which means deciding which concessions are better to be made. Using the elements of MACBETH allows determining the strong interval scale based on verbal judgments defined by negotiators at the beginning of the preference elicitation process. We study in detail the legitimacy of hybridizing ZAPROS and MACBETH that differ in their philosophies of decision support as well as discuss the drawbacks of these two MCDM methods and propose some alternative solutions that make this approach applicable to supporting negotiators in the evaluation of negotiation offers. Finally, we present an example in which we indicate the differences in the negotiation offers' scoring process conducted by means of MARS and the traditional ZAPROS and MACBETH procedures.

A Game Theoretic Model of Choosing a Valuable Good via a Short List Heuristic

“…It should be noted that, in practice, the decisions made in both stages may be based on a number of criteria. In such cases, various methods for ranking based on multiple criteria (e.g., TOPSIS, see Yoon and Hwang [30], or MARS, see Górecka et al [31]) can be used to rank offers according to the signals observed. The author intends to apply such an approach in the future.…”

Using Sipres – A Fusion of the Revised Simos’ Procedure and Zapros – in the Road Route Selection Process

“…It is based on two methods: revised Simos' procedure [Figueira, Roy, 2002] and ZAPROS [Larichev, Moshkovich, 1995], and aims at obtaining a complete ranking of the alternatives with scores measured on a cardinal scale. The SIPRES method was introduced in 2015 [Górecka, 2015] as a continuation of the works on a tool for the verbal evaluation of the negotiation template connected with the MARS approach [see: Górecka et al, 2014;Górecka et al, 2016]. Based on the original paper, in which two baseline methods were also presented, a detailed description of the SIPRES algorithm is given below.…”

Holistic Preferences and Prenegotiation Preparation

“…This requires a mutual understanding of the counterpart's needs and acknowledging the necessity of making concessions, which inherently makes a problem of developing an adequate negotiation approach. The false assumption regarding such an approach is that it may be either soft or hard (Fisher et al 2011). In fact, neither of these approaches is considered efficient, as they are focused on some social and psychological elements of negotiation game and parties (people) themselves, rather than on the potential value that may be created when the problem under consideration is solved.…”