IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/iasawp/ir98024.html

Rational Inefficient Compromises in Negotiation

Author

Listed:
  • G.E. Kersten
  • G.R. Mallory

Abstract

It has often been assumed that rational negotiators who achieve inefficient compromises should accept Pareto improvements suggested by some external party, such as an expert mediator, or a computer system. Following this assumption an argument is made to give legitimacy to efficient compromises generated by a negotiation support system or to entice a partymove to a Pareto improvement. The simplificatons made in model construction on the one hand and the very narrow and limited considerations of rationality in present negotiation support systems on the other, suggest a different approach to support. This approach is based on engaging users to a sound process confronting them with their inconsisencies rather than providing solutions or promoting improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • G.E. Kersten & G.R. Mallory, 1998. "Rational Inefficient Compromises in Negotiation," Working Papers ir98024, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    • Handle: RePEc:wop:iasawp:ir98024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-98-024.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-98-024.ps
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McClennen,Edward F., 1990. "Rationality and Dynamic Choice," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521360470.
    2. G.E. Kersten & S.J. Noronha, 1997. "Negotiation Via the World Wide Web: A Cross-Cultural Study of Decision Making," Working Papers ir97052, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    3. Nancy J Adler & John L Graham, 1989. "Cross-Cultural Interaction: The International Comparison Fallacy?," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 20(3), pages 515-537, September.
    4. Vesna Prasnikar & Alvin E. Roth, 1992. "Considerations of Fairness and Strategy: Experimental Data from Sequential Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 865-888.
    5. Amnon Rapoport & Ido Erev & Rami Zwick, 1995. "An Experimental Study of Buyer-Seller Negotiation with One-Sided Incomplete Information and Time Discounting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 377-394, March.
    6. Thompson, Leigh & Loewenstein, George, 1992. "Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 176-197, March.
    7. G.E. Kersten & S.J. Noronha, 1997. "Supporting International Negotiation with a WWW-Based System," Working Papers ir97049, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    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. 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.

    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. G.E. Kersten & S.J. Noronha, 1998. "Negotiation and the Web: Users' Perception and Acceptance," Working Papers ir98002, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. D. Cray & G.E. Kersten, 1999. "Negotiating Inefficient Compromises: Is Less Better than More?," Working Papers ir99022, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    3. 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.
    4. Joydeep Srivastava & Dipankar Chakravarti & Amnon Rapoport, 2000. "Price and Margin Negotiations in Marketing Channels: An Experimental Study of Sequential Bargaining Under One-sided Uncertainty and Opportunity Cost of Delay," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 163-184, October.
    5. G.E. Kersten & S.J. Noronha, 1997. "Negotiation Via the World Wide Web: A Cross-Cultural Study of Decision Making," Working Papers ir97052, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    6. G.E. Kersten & T.R. Madan Mohan & S.J. Noronha & M.J. Kersten, 1998. "Learning Business Negotiations with Web-based Systems: The Case of IIMB," Working Papers ir98049, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    7. Srivastava, Joydeep, 2001. "The Role of Inferences in Sequential Bargaining with One-Sided Incomplete Information: Some Experimental Evidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 166-187, May.
    8. Christian Koboldt, 1996. "Consistent planning, backwards induction, and rule-governed behavior," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 35-48, March.
    9. Armin Falk & Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2003. "On the Nature of Fair Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(1), pages 20-26, January.
    10. Stefan Kohler & European University Institute, 2006. "Inequality Aversion and Stochastic Decision-making: Experimental Evidence from Zimbabwean Villages after Land Reform," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-061, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    11. Christian Korth, 2009. "Reciprocity—An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Fairness in Bargaining and Markets, chapter 0, pages 35-55, Springer.
    12. Binmore, Ken & McCarthy, John & Ponti, Giovanni & Samuelson, Larry & Shaked, Avner, 2002. "A Backward Induction Experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 48-88, May.
    13. Oczkowski, Edward, 1998. "An econometric analysis of the bilateral monopoly model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 53-69, January.
    14. Nathalie Etchart, 2002. "Adequate Moods for non-eu Decision Making in a Sequential Framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 1-28, February.
    15. Adrian de Groot Ruiz & Theo Offerman & Sander Onderstal, 2011. "An Experimental Study of Credible Deviations and ACDC," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-153/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Liu, Yanju & Lu, Hai & Veenstra, Kevin, 2014. "Is sin always a sin? The interaction effect of social norms and financial incentives on market participants’ behavior," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 289-307.
    17. Anca Diana SUMÄ‚NARU, 2021. "Developing A Conceptual Model Framework On Setting Negotiation Strategies In Audit Decision-Making Processes," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 2(23), pages 1-11.
    18. Eran Hanany & Peter Klibanoff, 2008. "Updating Ambiguity Averse Preferences," Discussion Papers 1468, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    19. Yi, Kang-Oh, 2005. "Quantal-response equilibrium models of the ultimatum bargaining game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 324-348, May.
    20. Volinskiy, Dmitriy & Bergstrom, John C. & Cornwell, Christopher M. & Holmes, Thomas P., 2010. "A Pseudo-Sequential Choice Model for Valuing Multi-Attribute Environmental Policies or Programs in Contingent Valuation Applications," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 9-21, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wop:iasawp:ir98024. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iiasaat.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.