IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v7y1998i2d10.1023_a1008606709761.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market Alternatives, Third Party Intervention, and Third Party Informedness in Negotiation

Author

Listed:
  • Vairam Arunachalam

    (University of Missouri)

  • William Dilla

    (University of Missouri)

  • Marjorie Shelley

    (University of Illinois)

  • Chris Chan

    (Macquarie University)

Abstract

Negotiation is one possible mechanism for setting transfer prices when no unique transfer price is obviously correct, allowing divisional managers to run their divisions with some degree of autonomy. This study examines the effects of market alternatives, third party intervention and third party informedness in transfer pricing negotiation. Experiment 1 examined the effects of market alternatives in a fully crossed design of buyer and seller's Best Alternatives To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) at four levels (no, low, medium, or high). Experiment 2 examined the effects of third party intervention with reference to role (binding vs. nonbinding) and informedness (informed vs. uninformed). Results of Experiment 1 indicated that both the existence and level of market alternatives affected reservation prices, expected profits, aspiration levels, and individual profits. Dyads with unequal BATNAs did not obtain higher joint profits than those with equal BATNAs, while dyads with unequal BATNAs distributed profits more unevenly between negotiators than dyads with equal BATNAs. Results of Experiment 2 indicated that only making the third party's role binding had an effect on joint profits. However, the presence of a third party and both the role and informedness manipulations affected resource distribution.

Suggested Citation

  • Vairam Arunachalam & William Dilla & Marjorie Shelley & Chris Chan, 1998. "Market Alternatives, Third Party Intervention, and Third Party Informedness in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 81-107, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:7:y:1998:i:2:d:10.1023_a:1008606709761
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008606709761
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1008606709761
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1008606709761?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pinkley, Robin L. & Neale, Margaret A. & Bennett, Rebecca J., 1994. "The Impact of Alternatives to Settlement in Dyadic Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 97-116, January.
    2. Thomas A. Kochan & Todd Jick, 1978. "The Public Sector Mediation Process," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(2), pages 209-240, June.
    3. White, Sally Blount & Valley, Kathleen L. & Bazerman, Max H. & Neale, Margaret A. & Peck, Sharon R., 1994. "Alternative Models of Price Behavior in Dyadic Negotiations: Market Prices, Reservation Prices, and Negotiator Aspirations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 430-447, March.
    4. Arunachalam, Vairam & Dilla, William N., 1995. "Judgment Accuracy and Outcomes in Negotiation: A Causal Modeling Analysis of Decision-Aiding Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 289-304, March.
    5. White, Sally Blount & Neale, Margaret A., 1994. "The Role of Negotiator Aspirations and Settlement Expectancies in Bargaining Outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 303-317, February.
    6. Thompson, Leigh & Hastie, Reid, 1990. "Social perception in negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 98-123, October.
    7. Bazerman, Max H. & Neale, Margaret A. & Valley, Kathleen L. & Zajac, Edward J. & Kim, Yong Min, 1992. "The effect of agents and mediators on negotiation outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 55-73, October.
    8. Tripp, Thomas M. & Sondak, Harris, 1992. "An evaluation of dependent variables in experimental negotiation studies: Impasse rates and pareto efficiency," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 273-295, March.
    9. Spicer, Barry H., 1988. "Towards an organizational theory of the transfer pricing process," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 303-322, April.
    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. Caputo, Andrea, 2016. "Overcoming judgmental biases in negotiations: A scenario-based survey analysis on third party direct intervention," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4304-4312.
    2. Ricky S. Wong & Susan Howard, 2017. "Blinded by Power: Untangling Mixed Results Regarding Power and Efficiency in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 215-245, March.

    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. Tey, Kian Siong & Schaerer, Michael & Madan, Nikhil & Swaab, Roderick I., 2021. "The Impact of Concession Patterns on Negotiations: When and Why Decreasing Concessions Lead to a Distributive Disadvantage," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 153-166.
    2. Michael Ahearne & Yashar Atefi & Son K. Lam & Mohsen Pourmasoudi, 2022. "The future of buyer–seller interactions: a conceptual framework and research agenda," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 22-45, January.
    3. Schaerer, Michael & Loschelder, David D. & Swaab, Roderick I., 2016. "Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 156-171.
    4. Brett, Jeanne & Thompson, Leigh, 2016. "Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 68-79.
    5. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    6. Brady, Garrett L. & Inesi, M. Ena & Mussweiler, Thomas, 2021. "The power of lost alternatives in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 59-80.
    7. Hart, Einav & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2020. "Getting to less: When negotiating harms post-agreement performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 155-175.
    8. Kristensen, Henrik & Garling, Tommy, 1997. "Determinants of buyers' aspiration and reservation price," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 487-503, September.
    9. Beuk, Frederik & Rubin, Eran, 2021. "Data-based negotiator allocation management," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 537-552.
    10. Sascha Alavi & Johannes Habel & Marco Schwenke & Christian Schmitz, 2020. "Price negotiating for services: elucidating the ambivalent effects on customers’ negotiation aspirations," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 165-185, March.
    11. Ricky S. Wong & Susan Howard, 2017. "Blinded by Power: Untangling Mixed Results Regarding Power and Efficiency in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 215-245, March.
    12. Lee, Alice J. & Loschelder, David D. & Schweinsberg, Martin & Mason, Malia F. & Galinsky, Adam D., 2018. "Too precise to pursue: How precise first offers create barriers-to-entry in negotiations and markets," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 87-100.
    13. Leonardelli, Geoffrey J. & Gu, Jun & McRuer, Geordie & Medvec, Victoria Husted & Galinsky, Adam D., 2019. "Multiple equivalent simultaneous offers (MESOs) reduce the negotiator dilemma: How a choice of first offers increases economic and relational outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 64-83.
    14. Stephen E. Weiss, 2012. "Negotiators’ Effectiveness with Mixed Agendas: An Empirical Exploration of Tasks, Decisions and Performance Criteria," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 255-290, May.
    15. Kern, Mary C. & Brett, Jeanne M. & Weingart, Laurie R. & Eck, Chase S., 2020. "The “fixed” pie perception and strategy in dyadic versus multiparty negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 143-158.
    16. Swaab, Roderick I. & Lount, Robert B. & Chung, Seunghoo & Brett, Jeanne M., 2021. "Setting the stage for negotiations: How superordinate goal dialogues promote trust and joint gain in negotiations between teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 157-169.
    17. Sujin Lee, 2005. "Judgment of Ingroups and Outgroups in Intra- and Intercultural Negotiation: The Role of Interdependent Self-Construal in Judgment Timing," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 43-62, January.
    18. Oza, Shweta S. & Srivastava, Joydeep & Koukova, Nevena T., 2010. "How suspicion mitigates the effect of influence tactics," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 1-10, May.
    19. Hillie Aaldering & Shirli Kopelman, 2022. "Dovish and Hawkish Influence in Distributive and Integrative Negotiations: The Role of (A)symmetry in Constituencies," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 111-136, February.
    20. Backhaus, & Pesch,, 2018. "Verhandlungen – Spiegeln die Lehrbücher den Stand der Forschung wider?," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 72(1), pages 3-26.

    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:spr:grdene:v:7:y:1998:i:2:d:10.1023_a:1008606709761. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.