Binding Versus Final-Offer Arbitration: A Combination is Best
AbstractA new procedure is proposed for settling disputes which combines binding arbitration (BA) and final-offer arbitration (FOA). Unlike either of the two pure procedures, combined arbitration (CA) induces the two parties to converge in making their final offers. Under BA, the arbitrator's settlement is binding on the two sides; under FOA, the arbitrator chooses the final offer of the party closer to what he/she considers a fair settlement. Under CA, FOA is used if the arbitrator's notion of a fair settlement falls between the two final offers or if the final offers converge or crisscross; otherwise, BA is used. When modeled as a two-person, zero-sum game of imperfect information, in which the two parties make final offers to maximize their expected payoffs---based on their perception of the arbitrator's probability distribution of fair settlements---convergence is to the median and constitutes a global equilibrium if the probability distribution is continuous, unimodal, and symmetric about the median. When the distribution is not symmetric or the two parties have different distributions, alternative solutions are derived---including one based on the parties' being within a "critical distance" of each other---and illustrated by examples. Alternatives to the arbitrator's decision calculus are considered, and questions about applying the new arbitration procedure are discussed.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.
Volume (Year): 32 (1986)
Issue (Month): 10 (October)
game theory; arbitration; bargaining;
Other versions of this item:
- Brams, Steven J. & Merrill, Samuel III, 1984. "Binding Versus Final-Offer Arbitration: A Combination is Best," Working Papers 84-07, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- repec:kap:expeco:v:10:y:2007:i:4:p:439-454 is not listed on IDEAS
- Willson, Stephen J., 2000. "Axioms for the outcomes of negotiation in matrix games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 323-348, May.
- Armstrong, Michael J. & Hurley, W. J., 2002. "Arbitration using the closest offer principle of arbitrator behavior," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 19-26, January.
- Zeng, Dao-Zhi, 2006. "How powerful is arbitration procedure AFOA?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 227-240, June.
- David Dickinson, 2005.
"Bargaining Outcomes with Double-Offer Arbitration,"
Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 145-166, June.
- Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2001. "Perfect Equilibria in a Model of Bargaining with Arbitration," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 170-195, October.
- Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter J., 2010.
"Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?,"
IZA Discussion Papers
4941, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, Elsevier.
- Gary Charness & Peter J. Kuhn, 2010. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," NBER Working Papers 15913, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Barberà, Salvador & Coelho, Danilo, 2010.
"On the rule of k names,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 44-61, September.
- Salvador Barberà & Danilo Coelho, 2004. "On the rule of K names," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 636.04, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC), revised 13 Mar 2007.
- Salvador Barberà & Danilo Coelho, 2004. "On the rule of K names," Working Papers 264, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- David Dickinson, 2003.
"The Chilling Effect Of Optimism: The Case of Final-Offer Arbitration,"
2003-01, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
- Dickinson, David L., 2006. "The chilling effect of optimism: The case of final-offer arbitration," The Journal of Socio-Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 17-30, February.
- Deck, Cary A. & Farmer, Amy, 2009. "Strategic bidding and investments in final offer arbitration: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 361-373, May.
- Zeng, Dao-Zhi & Nakamura, Shinya & Ibaraki, Toshihide, 1996. "Double-offer arbitration," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 147-170, June.
- Zeng, Dao-Zhi, 2003. "An amendment to final-offer arbitration," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 9-19, August.
- Mazalov, Vladimir & Tokareva, Julia, 2012. "Arbitration procedures with multiple arbitrators," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(1), pages 198-203.
- Hurley, W. J., 2003. "Effects of multiple arbitrators on final-offer arbitration settlements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 660-664, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.