After Madrid and Maastricht ... Should we rethink negotiations?

Game theory, as a guide for coming to terms with negotiations, is not comprehensive enough for the fluidity of today's events. A new, more powerful model is proposed that views negotiations, not as confrontations between 2 players, but as temporary organizations created by the negotiators thems...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean business review Vol. 93; no. 4; p. 19
Main Authors Garson, Jose, Quillien, Jenny
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Bradford Emerald Group Publishing Limited 01.07.1993
Subjects
Agricultural subsidies
Game theory
Heuristic
Implementations
International relations
Negotiations
Organization development
Subsidies
Europe
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Game theory, as a guide for coming to terms with negotiations, is not comprehensive enough for the fluidity of today's events. A new, more powerful model is proposed that views negotiations, not as confrontations between 2 players, but as temporary organizations created by the negotiators themselves. More specifically, the heuristic model involves the following characteristics: 1. A negotiation can be equated with a temporary organization created by the negotiators and composed of the negotiating teams. 2. A negotiation is understood better as a negotiation-as-organization, which is endowed with boundaries, procedures, rules, common and conflicting objectives, and roles for the people involved. 3. The success of any negotiation is dependent on the ability of the negotiation-as-organization to learn how to cope with inconsistencies.
ISSN:0955-534X
1758-7107