Negotiation: Critique on the nature of Trust in Negotiations. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Role of Trust in Integrative Negotiations
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management www.ejkm.com, 2018
This paper discusses trust as a foundation for integrative negotiations, where strategy and information sharing play a critical role. In the increasingly global and interconnected economy, negotiation processes became a vital part in the political, social, economic and particularly business spheres, and have evolved over time. Building integrative negotiations relies on trust among the parties, affecting the process of information and knowledge sharing during the negotiation meetings. By presenting empirical findings, the purpose of the paper is to provide theoretical views and insights for further research, and practical implications for negotiators and professionals in general. Trust has emerged as an increasingly important intangible and intellectual relational asset in and between organizations, developed and sustained in interaction between people. Trust forms a foundation for collaboration and cooperation in and between organizations. The research questions are: i) what role does trust/distrust play in integrative negotiations; ii) how trust/distrust manifest during the negotiation meetings; iii) how trust and negotiation strategy affect information sharing in integrative negotiations. Empirical findings are presented based on qualitative data from two cross-cultural case studies related to negotiation processes in different contexts-international trade at the governmental level, and contract negotiation within a private enterprise – implying four countries in Latin America, Asia and Europe.
2013
The phenomenon of trust is based on the principle and expectation that people keep their promises. Keeping promises enhances cooperation and efficiency. Although an element of trust can be found in every business transaction (Arrow, 1972), there are individual differences among people. People sometimes abuse trust and override decisions in order to increase their individual payoffs in a strategic interaction. Therefore, mechanisms to promote trust behavior are needed. One of the strongest among them is communication (Ostrom, 2003). Communication regarding the distribution of outcomes (hereafter referred as negotiation context) gives opportunities to learn about the interaction partner and assess the credibility and reliability of prior promises. As communication promotes trust, so trust leads to cooperation, and allows for more efficient outcomes. Within the framework of this dissertation, we address the problem of trust behavior in the context of negotiations. From the economic per...
Managing Parties' Conflicts in Negotiation: The Trust-Based Corollary
Conflict negotiation at work has taken some serious intractable dimension to such an extent that even when one grievance bargaining scenario is resolves, another emerges. It thus becomes the concern of this study to examine the critical involvement of trust as compelling factor in managing parties conflict in workplace negotiations. To address this, 10 and private sectors organizations were sampled from Bayelsa and Rivers State in Nigeria. Using the institutional unit of analysis, 82 responses drawn from the 10 sample organizations provided data which were analysed using SPSS version 15 and result showed that trust is significantly related to the success of negotiation between parties in disputes. It is therefore concluded that organizational trust which becomes the expectant in the outcome of parties' negotiation should be pursued with utmost vigour and enshrined in the culture of the organizations.
Journal of Management Policies and Practices, 2015
The article deals with the problems of confidence building in business negotiations and business meetings. It analyzes the confidence interference, stereotypes and substitutes. At the beginning of business negotiations and business meetings interlocutors are trying to decipher and understand their opponents, seeing to each other under the external image. Impressions that arise in monitoring the appearance of the interlocutor, is of great importance. First of all, it should be noted that negotiator knowing his opponent, improves himself, since he is improving his cognitive powers. On the other hand, cognitive accuracy, disclosure of internal essence of interlocutors, determines course and future results of the business meetings and business negotiations. When trying to understand the opponent or interlocutor opinion formed in advance has a very great influence. This determines how information will be accepted and interpreted. Confidence plays a positive impact on the relations in negotiating group of representative organization, on relations with other negotiating side. It liberates and mobilizes the actions of negotiator, encourages creative, innovative activity with other people, reduces uncertainty and risk, and increases possible options for action. Trust is necessary to feel that negotiating partner or interlocutor betray us, to tune working together and to plan it, to venture intentionally, to communicate securely.
The Importance of Trust and Information Sharing for Integrative Negotiations
In the increasingly global and interconnected economy, negotiation processes became a vital part in the political, social, economic, and particularly business spheres, and have evolved over time. Building integrative negotiations relies on trust among the parties, affecting the process of information and knowledge sharing during the negotiation meetings. Trust has emerged as an increasingly important intangible asset in and between organizations, as an intellectual relational asset developed and sustained in interaction between people, forming a foundation for collaboration and cooperation in and between organizations. Through building and sustaining trust (avoiding distrust), organizational intellectual capital and overall business competitiveness can be enhanced. This paper discusses trust as a foundation for integrative negotiations, where strategy and information sharing play a critical role. The research questions are: what role does trust/distrust play in integrative negotiations, and how trust/distrust manifest during the negotiation meetings. Moreover, how trust and strategy affect information sharing in integrative negotiations to reach a mutually beneficial agreement. Empirical findings are presented based on qualitative data from two case studies, covering different contexts-international trade, and contract negotiation within an organisation-and four countries in Latin America, Asia and Europe. The purpose of the paper is to provide insights for further research by empirical findings and practical implications for negotiators and professionals in general.
Academy of Management Journal, 2013
Trust has long been recognized, by scholars and practitioners alike, as an important factor for negotiation success. However, there has been little effort to date to empirically review or theoretically synthesize the research on trust in the context of negotiations. We present a social exchange framework that describes the processes through which trust influences negotiation behaviors and outcomes. We identified three critical contingencies that modified the effects of trust on negotiation behaviors and outcomes. A meta-analysis on a sample of 38 independent studies provided considerable support for the model, and also confirmed the importance of the three contingencies for understanding the effects of trust. The framework and accompanying empirical evidence provide a necessary theoretical and empirical integration of the trust and negotiation literatures. Based on the theory and meta-analytical findings, we identified critical gaps and limitations in existing research, and we propose a research agenda to address key theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues identified by our framework and review.
Fragile and Resilient Trust: Risk and Uncertainty in Negotiated and Reciprocal Exchange
Sociological Theory, 2009
Both experimental and ethnographic studies show that reciprocal exchanges (in which actors unilaterally provide benefits to each other without formal agreements) produce stronger trust than negotiated exchanges secured by binding agreements. We develop the theoretical role of risk and uncertainty as causal mechanisms that potentially explain these results, and then test their effects in two laboratory experiments that vary risk and uncertainty within negotiated and reciprocal forms of exchange. We increase risk in negotiated exchanges by making agreements nonbinding and decrease uncertainty in reciprocal exchanges by having actors communicate their intentions.