IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i4p933-d1066099.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Negotiating Abilities in the Construction Sector: A Proposed Mathematical Model Using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis Method

Author

Listed:
  • Mohamed Algezawy

    (Department of Management, College of Business Administration, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsaa 380, Saudi Arabia)

  • Alaa M. S. Azazz

    (Department of Tourism and Hospitality, Arts College, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsaa 380, Saudi Arabia
    Tourism Studies Department, Faculty of Tourism and Hotels, Suez Canal University, Ismailia 41522, Egypt)

  • Magdy E. A. Tork

    (Department of Accounting, College of Business Administration, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsaa 380, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ibrahim A. Elshaer

    (Department of Management, College of Business Administration, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsaa 380, Saudi Arabia
    Hotel Studies Department, Faculty of Tourism and Hotels, Suez Canal University, Ismailia 41522, Egypt)

Abstract

This study aims to develop a mathematical model for evaluating the objective abilities needed for negotiation and to provide a tool that companies can use to select a negotiation team. The model was constructed using a Likert pentagonal scale, where numbers from 5 to 1 represented the level of agreement or disagreement, and seven objective abilities were considered, including analytical ability, economic knowledge, legal knowledge, linguistic ability, psychological understanding, normative understanding, and general knowledge. The model was tested using a structured interview (sixteen interviews) with experts and specialists in the construction industry as a case study and then validated by quantitative data analysis method using first-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with a sample of consultants (220 responses) from companies and offices related to the construction sector. The study found that the model is valid for use in the construction industry and can be useful for selecting negotiators. The developed model can be used, adapted, and modified according to the needs of different negotiation situations. This research is the first of its kind to develop a mathematical model for evaluating negotiating abilities and can be used as a model for similar research studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohamed Algezawy & Alaa M. S. Azazz & Magdy E. A. Tork & Ibrahim A. Elshaer, 2023. "Modeling Negotiating Abilities in the Construction Sector: A Proposed Mathematical Model Using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:4:p:933-:d:1066099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/4/933/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/4/933/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James R. Faulconbridge, 2008. "Negotiating cultures of work in transnational law firms," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 497-517, July.
    2. Janice Nadler & Leigh Thompson & Leaf Van Boven, 2003. "Learning Negotiation Skills: Four Models of Knowledge Creation and Transfer," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 529-540, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gordon L Clark & Ashby H B Monk, 2014. "The Geography of Investment Management Contracts: The UK, Europe, and the Global Financial Services Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(3), pages 531-549, March.
    2. Brett, Jeanne & Thompson, Leigh, 2016. "Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 68-79.
    3. Ilya R. P. Cuypers & Youtha Cuypers & Xavier Martin, 2017. "When the target may know better: Effects of experience and information asymmetries on value from mergers and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 609-625, March.
    4. Sam Tavassoli & Viroj Jienwatcharamongkhol & Pia Arenius, 2023. "Colocation of Entrepreneurs and New Firm Survival: Role of New Firm Founder’s Experiential Relatedness to Local Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(4), pages 1421-1459, July.
    5. Tim R. Holcomb & R. Duane Ireland & R. Michael Holmes Jr. & Michael A. Hitt, 2009. "Architecture of Entrepreneurial Learning: Exploring the Link among Heuristics, Knowledge, and Action," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 167-192, January.
    6. James R. Faulconbridge, 2009. "The Regulation of Design in Global Architecture Firms: Embedding and Emplacing Buildings," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(12), pages 2537-2554, November.
    7. Müller, Felix Claus & Ibert, Oliver, 2014. "(Re-)Sources of Innovation: Understanding and Comparing Innovation Dynamics through the Lens of Communities of Practice," IRS Working Papers 52, Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space (IRS).
    8. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    9. Jodi L. Short & Michael W. Toffel & Andrea R. Hugill, 2016. "Code Contingencies: Designing Monitoring Regimes to Promote Improvement in Supply Chain Working Conditions," Harvard Business School Working Papers 17-001, Harvard Business School, revised Mar 2019.
    10. Kai Pflanz, 2013. "Seeking Opportunities: International Market Selection by European Engineering Consultancies," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 104(5), pages 556-570, December.
    11. Ogliastri, Enrique & Quintanilla, Carlos & Benetti, Sara, 2023. "International negotiation prototypes: The impact of culture," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    12. Nava Ashraf & Natalie Bau & Corinne Low & Kathleen McGinn, 2018. "Negotiating a Better Future: How Interpersonal Skills Facilitate Inter-Generational Investment," Working Papers 2018-023, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    13. Gonzales Martinez, Rolando & D’Espallier, Bert & Mersland, Roy, 2021. "Bifurcations in business profitability: An agent-based simulation of homophily in self-financing groups," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 495-514.
    14. Marco Furlotti & Giuseppe Soda, 2018. "Fit for the Task: Complementarity, Asymmetry, and Partner Selection in Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 837-854, October.
    15. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    16. Beuk, Frederik & Rubin, Eran, 2021. "Data-based negotiator allocation management," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 537-552.
    17. Dedy Dewanto Soeprapto, 2021. "Correlation between knowledge exchange & combination (KEC) and leader member exchange (LMX)," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(4), pages 169-182, June.
    18. Volkema, Roger J., 2009. "Why Dick and Jane don't ask: Getting past initiation barriers in negotiations," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 52(6), pages 595-604, November.
    19. Tavassoli, Sam & Jienwatcharamongkhol, Viroj & Arenius, Pia, 2021. "Colocation of Entrepreneurs and New Firm Survival: Role of New Firm Founder’s Experiential Relatedness to Local Entrepreneurs," Papers in Innovation Studies 2021/13, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    20. Francisco I. Vega-Gomez & Francisco J. Miranda-Gonzalez, 2021. "Choosing between Formal and Informal Technology Transfer Channels: Determining Factors among Spanish Academicians," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:4:p:933-:d:1066099. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.