IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v45y1999i12p1697-1709.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generating Pareto Solutions in a Two-Party Setting: Constraint Proposal Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Harri Ehtamo

    (Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, POB 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland)

  • Raimo P. Hämäläinen

    (Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, POB 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland)

  • Pirja Heiskanen

    (Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, POB 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland)

  • Jeffrey Teich

    (New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88001)

  • Markku Verkama

    (Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, POB 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland)

  • Stanley Zionts

    (State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York 14260)

Abstract

This paper presents a class of methods, called constraint proposal methods, for generating Pareto-optimal solutions in two-party negotiations. In these methods joint tangents of the decision makers' value functions are searched by adjusting an artificial plane constraint. The problem of generating Pareto-optimal solutions decomposes into ordinary multiple criteria decision-making problems for the individual decision makers and into a coordination problem for an assisting mediator. Depending on the numerical iteration scheme used to solve the coordination problem, different constraint proposal methods are obtained. We analyze and illustrate the behaviour of some iteration schemes by numerical examples using both precise and imprecise answers from decision makers. An example of a method belonging to the class under study is the RAMONA method, that has been previously described from a practical point of view. We present the underlying theory for it by describing it as a constraint proposal method, and include some applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Harri Ehtamo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Pirja Heiskanen & Jeffrey Teich & Markku Verkama & Stanley Zionts, 1999. "Generating Pareto Solutions in a Two-Party Setting: Constraint Proposal Methods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(12), pages 1697-1709, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:12:p:1697-1709
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.45.12.1697
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.12.1697
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.45.12.1697?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James K. Sebenius, 1992. "Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 18-38, January.
    2. Osborne, Dale K, 1976. "Cartel Problems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(5), pages 835-844, December.
    3. Markku Kuula, 1998. "Solving Intra-Company Conflicts Using the RAMONA-Interactive Negotiation Support System," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(6), pages 447-464, November.
    4. Teich, Jeffrey E. & Wallenius, Hannele & Kuula, Markku & Zionts, Stanley, 1995. "A decision support approach for negotiation with an application to agricultural income policy negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 76-87, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rudolf Vetschera & Michael Filzmoser & Ronald Mitterhofer, 2014. "An Analytical Approach to Offer Generation in Concession-Based Negotiation Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-99, January.
    2. Pirja Heiskanen, 2001. "Generating Pareto‐optimal boundary points in multiparty negotiations using constraint proposal method," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 210-225, April.
    3. Ehtamo, Harri & Kettunen, Eero & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Searching for joint gains in multi-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 54-69, April.
    4. Zhang, Linlan & Song, Haigang & Chen, Xueguang & Hong, Liu, 2011. "A simultaneous multi-issue negotiation through autonomous agents," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 95-105, April.
    5. Heiskanen, Pirja & Ehtamo, Harri & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Constraint proposal method for computing Pareto solutions in multi-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 44-61, August.
    6. Paula Sarabando & Luís C. Dias & Rudolf Vetschera, 2013. "Mediation with Incomplete Information: Approaches to Suggest Potential Agreements," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 561-597, May.
    7. Nicolas Quérou & Patrick Rio & Mabel Tidball, 2007. "Multi-Party Negotiation When Agents Have Subjective Estimates of Bargaining Powers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 417-436, September.
    8. Guoming Lai & Katia Sycara, 2009. "A Generic Framework for Automated Multi-attribute Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 169-187, March.
    9. Gregory E. Kersten, 2001. "Modeling Distributive and Integrative Negotiations. Review and Revised Characterization," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 493-514, November.
    10. M. Kitti & H. Ehtamo, 2009. "Adjustment of an Affine Contract with a Fixed-Point Iteration," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 477-497, March.
    11. Guoming Lai & Cuihong Li & Katia Sycara, 2006. "Efficient Multi-Attribute Negotiation with Incomplete Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 511-528, September.
    12. Harri Ehtamo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 2001. "Interactive Multiple‐Criteria Methods for Reaching Pareto Optimal Agreements in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 475-491, November.
    13. Ivan Marsa-Maestre & Miguel A. Lopez-Carmona & Juan A. Carral & Guillermo Ibanez, 2013. "A Recursive Protocol for Negotiating Contracts Under Non-monotonic Preference Structures," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-43, January.
    14. Kitti, Mitri & Ehtamo, Harri, 2007. "Analysis of the constraint proposal method for two-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 817-827, September.
    15. H. J. Corsair & Jennifer Bassman Ruch & Pearl Q. Zheng & Benjamin F. Hobbs & Joseph F. Koonce, 2009. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Stream Restoration: Potential and Examples," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 387-417, July.
    16. Lou, Youcheng & Wang, Shouyang, 2016. "Approximate representation of the Pareto frontier in multiparty negotiations: Decentralized methods and privacy preservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 968-976.

    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. Heiskanen, Pirja & Ehtamo, Harri & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Constraint proposal method for computing Pareto solutions in multi-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 44-61, August.
    2. Harri Ehtamo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 2001. "Interactive Multiple‐Criteria Methods for Reaching Pareto Optimal Agreements in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 475-491, November.
    3. Heiskanen, Pirja, 1999. "Decentralized method for computing Pareto solutions in multiparty negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 578-590, September.
    4. Gregory Kersten & Sunil Noronha, 1999. "Negotiation via the World Wide Web: A Cross-cultural Study of Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 251-279, May.
    5. Nicolas Quérou & Patrick Rio & Mabel Tidball, 2007. "Multi-Party Negotiation When Agents Have Subjective Estimates of Bargaining Powers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 417-436, September.
    6. Lou, Youcheng & Wang, Shouyang, 2016. "Approximate representation of the Pareto frontier in multiparty negotiations: Decentralized methods and privacy preservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 968-976.
    7. Kitti, Mitri & Ehtamo, Harri, 2007. "Analysis of the constraint proposal method for two-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 817-827, September.
    8. Gregory E. Kersten, 2001. "Modeling Distributive and Integrative Negotiations. Review and Revised Characterization," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 493-514, November.
    9. Kenneth Koford, 1982. "Centralized vote-trading," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 245-268, January.
    10. Jos Timmermans, 2008. "Punctuated equilibrium in a non-linear system of action," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 350-375, December.
    11. de Mesnard, Louis, 2009. "Is the French mobile phone cartel really a cartel?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 663-677, December.
    12. Rufo, M.J. & Martín, J. & Pérez, C.J., 2016. "A Bayesian negotiation model for quality and price in a multi-consumer context," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 132-141.
    13. Ogliastri, Enrique & Quintanilla, Carlos & Benetti, Sara, 2023. "International negotiation prototypes: The impact of culture," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    14. Ray R. Hashemi & Louis A. Le Blanc, 2000. "Resource Allocation through Negotiation and Compromise: A Database Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 325-345, July.
    15. Tshering Chonzom, 2008. "Chinese Preconditions and Tibetan Initiatives," China Report, , vol. 44(2), pages 185-193, May.
    16. Alexander, Barbara & Libecap, Gary D., 2000. "The Effect of Cost Heterogeneity in the Success and Failure of the New Deal's Agricultural and Industrial Programs," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 370-400, October.
    17. Rudolf Vetschera & D. Kilgour, 2014. "Fair division of indivisible items between two players: design parameters for Contested Pile methods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 547-572, April.
    18. Ruud Gerards & Joan Muysken & Riccardo Welters, 2014. "Active Labour Market Policy by a Profit-Maximizing Firm," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(1), pages 136-157, March.
    19. Rasmusen, E., 1994. "A Model of Negotiation, not Bargainig," Papers 94-007, Indiana - Center for Econometric Model Research.
    20. Verkama, Markku & Heiskanen, Pirja, 1997. "Comment on a decision support approach for negotiation: Software vs. methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 202-204, January.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:12:p:1697-1709. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.