IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibf/gjbres/v8y2014i3p77-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Same Power But Different Goals: How Does Knowledge Of Opponents’ Power Affect Negotiators' Aspiration In Powerasymmetric Negotiations?

Author

Listed:
  • Ricky S. Wong

Abstract

This article focuses on dyadic negotiations in which negotiators have asymmetric best alternatives to the negotiated agreement (BATNAs). We argue it is important to consider negotiator’s knowledge states of opponent’s BATNAs. The experimental study also examined how negotiator’s perceptions of opponent’s BATNAs were formed and how knowledge given to different negotiators affected negotiator aspiration levels. The findings show that Negotiator estimates of opponent BATNAs are affected by their own BATNAs even when the range of possible BATNAs is given; strong negotiator’s knowledge of opponent’s BATNAs increases their aspiration levels; and weak negotiator’s knowledge reduces their aspiration levels. How knowledge of BATNA-asymmetries affects aspiration depends on which party has access to it.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricky S. Wong, 2014. "Same Power But Different Goals: How Does Knowledge Of Opponents’ Power Affect Negotiators' Aspiration In Powerasymmetric Negotiations?," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 8(3), pages 77-89.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibf:gjbres:v:8:y:2014:i:3:p:77-89
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.theibfr2.com/RePEc/ibf/gjbres/gjbr-v8n3-2014/GJBR-V8N3-2014-9.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Cameron & Thompson, Leigh L., 2004. "Affect from the top down: How powerful individuals' positive affect shapes negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 125-139, November.
    2. Brodt, Susan E., 1994. ""Inside Information" and Negotiator Decision Behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 172-202, May.
    3. L. L. Cummings & D. L. Harnett, 1969. "The Impact of Risk-Taking Propensity, Information, Communication and Terminal Bid," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 36(4), pages 485-501.
    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. Brett, Jeanne & Thompson, Leigh, 2016. "Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 68-79.
    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. Elfenbein, Hillary Anger, 2007. "Emotion in Organizations: A Review in Stages," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt2bn0n9mv, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    2. Victor Manuel Bennett, 2013. "Organization and Bargaining: Sales Process Choice at Auto Dealerships," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2003-2018, September.
    3. Andrzej Kozina, 2017. "Negotiation Competences of an Entrepreneur," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 15(65), pages 209-225.
    4. Peter Sheldon & Nancy Kohn, 2007. "AWAs and Individual Bargaining in the Era of WorkChoices: A Critical Evaluation Using Negotiation Theory," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 18(1), pages 115-142, November.
    5. Hart, Einav & Bear, Julia B. & Ren, Zhiying (Bella), 2024. "But what if I lose the offer? Negotiators’ inflated perception of their likelihood of jeopardizing a deal," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    6. William P. Bottom & Paul W. Paese, 1999. "Judgment Accuracy and the Asymmetric Cost of Errors in Distributive Bargaining," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 349-364, July.
    7. Berea Cristi, 2018. "Negotiation Analysis. The Context," Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(1), pages 284-288, July.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Beuk, Frederik & Rubin, Eran, 2021. "Data-based negotiator allocation management," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 537-552.
    11. Hart, Einav & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2022. "When we should care more about relationships than favorable deal terms in negotiation: The economic relevance of relational outcomes (ERRO)," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Michele Griessmair & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2009. "Exploring the Cognitive-Emotional Fugue in Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 213-234, May.
    13. Morgan, Timothy J. & Gomez-Mejia, Luis R., 2014. "Hooked on a feeling: The affective component of socioemotional wealth in family firms," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 280-288.
    14. Roger Volkema, 2012. "Understanding initiation behavior in Brazilian negotiations: an analysis of four regional subcultures," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 9(2), pages 88-108, April.
    15. Moore, Don A., 2004. "Myopic prediction, self-destructive secrecy, and the unexpected benefits of revealing final deadlines in negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 125-139, July.
    16. Shirako, Aiwa & Kilduff, Gavin J. & Kray, Laura J., 2015. "Is there a place for sympathy in negotiation? Finding strength in weakness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 95-109.
    17. Zhang, Zhi-Xue & Liu, Leigh Anne & Ma, Li, 2021. "Negotiation beliefs: Comparing Americans and the Chinese," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5).
    18. Rothman, Naomi B. & Northcraft, Gregory B., 2015. "Unlocking integrative potential: Expressed emotional ambivalence and negotiation outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 65-76.
    19. Stanley, Laura J. & McDowell, William, 2014. "The role of interorganizational trust and organizational efficacy in family and nonfamily firms," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 264-275.
    20. Alice F. Stuhlmacher & Matthew V. Champagne, 2000. "The Impact of Time Pressure and Information on Negotiation Process and Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(6), pages 471-491, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA); Negotiation; Power Asymmetry; Knowledge; Aspiration;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General

    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:ibf:gjbres:v:8:y:2014:i:3:p:77-89. 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: Mercedes Jalbert (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.