IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rnd/arimbr/v13y2021i1p33-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building an Automated win-win Negotiation Process Model

Author

Listed:
  • Latifa Ghalayini
  • Dana Deeb

Abstract

This paper builds an automated negotiation process model for integrative negotiations. The process model defines and automates the necessary phases and activities along with the integrative negotiation approach principles to create win-win outcomes that mutually satisfy negotiating parties. However, to realize this objective, the negotiation literature and theories are reviewed to determine the relevant theories for integrative negotiations that help to develop and form the basis of the process model. After investigation, it became evident that three main theories, which are Decision Theory, Rational Choice Theory and Mutual Gains Theory, contribute to building the integrative process model by setting its phases and components. The model is composed of five main phases with several sub-phases. Decision theory with mutual gains theory provides the robust process model through several phases, and rational choice theory with mutual gains theory ensures they are implemented in a fair, objective manner to come up with a satisfying win-win solution. Hence, automated negotiation processes when designed in a robust manner that is based on the theory that serves integrative approaches could lead to win-win negotiation outcomes. The foundation of the win-win negotiation process model contributes to designing win-win negotiation outcomes through structuring automated negotiation and setting its phases along with the integrative negotiation principles. It develops the negotiation field by integrating automation and the integrative approach principles in a process model.

Suggested Citation

  • Latifa Ghalayini & Dana Deeb, 2021. "Building an Automated win-win Negotiation Process Model," Information Management and Business Review, AMH International, vol. 13(1), pages 33-46.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnd:arimbr:v:13:y:2021:i:1:p:33-46
    DOI: 10.22610/imbr.v13i1(I).3162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/imbr/article/view/3162/2028
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/imbr/article/view/3162
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22610/imbr.v13i1(I).3162?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. N.R. Jennings & P. Faratin & A.R. Lomuscio & S. Parsons & M.J. Wooldridge & C. Sierra, 2001. "Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 199-215, March.
    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. Karine Lamiraud & Julien Patris & Radu Vranceanu, 2023. "Experimental evidence on the value of time and structure in market negotiations," Working Papers hal-03989514, HAL.

    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. Jinsoo Park & Hamirahanim Abdul Rahman & Jihae Suh & Hazami Hussin, 2019. "A Study of Integrative Bargaining Model with Argumentation-Based Negotiation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-21, December.
    2. David C. Parkes & Jayant Kalagnanam, 2005. "Models for Iterative Multiattribute Procurement Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(3), pages 435-451, March.
    3. Juan M. Alberola & Vicent Botti & Jose M. Such, 2014. "Advances in infrastructures and tools for multiagent systems," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 163-167, April.
    4. Melvin F. Shakun, 2005. "Multi-bilateral Multi-issue E-negotiation in E-commerce with a Tit-for-Tat Computer Agent," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 383-392, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Wan, Long & Mei, Jiajie & Du, Jiangze, 2021. "Two-agent scheduling of unit processing time jobs to minimize total weighted completion time and total weighted number of tardy jobs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(1), pages 26-35.
    7. P. Ding & M. D. Gerst & G. Bang & M. E. Borsuk, 2015. "An Application of Automated Mediation to International Climate Treaty Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 885-903, September.
    8. Sigifredo Laengle & Nikunja Mohan Modak & Jose M. Merigo & Gustavo Zurita, 2018. "Twenty-Five Years of Group Decision and Negotiation: A Bibliometric Overview," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 505-542, August.
    9. Huiye Ma & Nicole Ronald & Theo Arentze & Harry Timmermans, 2013. "Negotiating on location, timing, duration, and participant in agent-mediated joint activity-travel scheduling," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 427-451, October.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Alessio R. Lomuscio & Michael Wooldridge & Nicholas R. Jennings, 2003. "A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 31-56, January.
    13. Daniel R. Georgiadis & Thomas A. Mazzuchi & Shahram Sarkani, 2013. "Using multi criteria decision making in analysis of alternatives for selection of enabling technology," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 287-303, September.
    14. Jorge E. Hernández & Josefa Mula & Raúl Poler & Andrew C. Lyons, 2014. "Collaborative Planning in Multi-tier Supply Chains Supported by a Negotiation-Based Mechanism and Multi-agent System," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 235-269, March.
    15. Jain, Vipul & Deshmukh, S.G., 2009. "Dynamic supply chain modeling using a new fuzzy hybrid negotiation mechanism," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 319-328, November.
    16. Sherry X. Sun & Jing Zhao & Sumit Sarkar, 2017. "How High Should We Go? Determining Reservation Values to Negotiate Successfully for Composite Software Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 353-377, June.
    17. Bo Yu & Rustam Vahidov, 2019. "Applying Social Interaction Theory to Negotiation Modeling: Design of E-negotiation System," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 703-718, June.
    18. Beaudoin, D. & Frayret, J.-M. & LeBel, L., 2010. "Negotiation-based distributed wood procurement planning within a multi-firm environment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 79-93, February.
    19. Hakim Alj & Morad Benyoucef & Rudolf K Keller & Kim Levy, 2002. "A Rule-driven Approach for Defining the Behavior of Negotiating Software Agents," CIRANO Working Papers 2002s-23, CIRANO.
    20. John Zeleznikow, 2021. "Using Artificial Intelligence to provide Intelligent Dispute Resolution Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 789-812, August.

    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:rnd:arimbr:v:13:y:2021:i:1:p:33-46. 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: Muhammad Tayyab (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/imbr .

    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.