Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Persuasion Strategies

Persuasion Strategies

Researchers have tested many persuasion strategies, including the foot-in-the door and the door-in-the-face techniques, in a variety of contexts. Ultimately, the principles are effective in selling products and changing people’s attitude, ideas, and behaviors (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004).

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000...

Decision Making: Traditional Method

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...

Social Exchange Theory

Social Exchange Theory

We have discussed why we form relationships, what attracts us to others, and different types of love. But what determines whether we are satisfied with and stay in a relationship? One theory that provides an explanation is social exchange theory. According to social exchange theory, we act as naïve economists in keeping a tally of the ratio of costs and benefits of forming and maintaining a relationship with others (Rusbult & Van Lange, 2003).

Social Exchange Theory

Social Exchange Theory

As formulated by John Thibaut and Harold Kelley, Social Exchange Theory explains human relationships as economic-like exchanges that maximize rewards and minimize costs. This theory suggests that individuals engage in relationships to gain benefits and reduce burdens, similar to economic transactions. It has been widely applied to various types of relationships, including romantic, professional, and social interactions.Rewards and Costs in RelationshipsRelationship rewards include emotional...

Decision Making: P-value Method

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

3-D negotiation. Playing the whole game.

Harvard business review·2003

Same author

Negotiating the spirit of the deal.

Harvard business review·2003

Same author

The hidden challenge of cross-border negotiations.

Harvard business review·2002

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Deal making 2.0: a guide to complex negotiations.

David A Lax¹, James K Sebenius

¹Lax Sebenius, USA.

Harvard Business Review

|November 20, 2012

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Negotiation campaigns, a strategic approach to complex deals, involve managing multiple parties across various fronts. This method, as seen in the port labor agreement, can achieve mutually beneficial outcomes more effectively than direct talks.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

Business Strategy
Negotiation Theory
Organizational Behavior

Background:

Large-scale business transactions are often composed of smaller, sequential deals.
Effective sequencing of these component deals is crucial for achieving strategic objectives over extended periods.
Direct negotiation may not always be the most effective strategy for complex, multi-party agreements.

Purpose of the Study:

To introduce and define the concept of a 'negotiation campaign' as a strategic approach to complex deal-making.
To explore the advantages of a multifront negotiation strategy over traditional direct negotiation.
To provide a framework for designing and executing successful negotiation campaigns.

Main Methods:

Conceptual framework development based on strategic negotiation principles.
Case study analysis, exemplified by the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) and Longshoremen agreement.
Identification of key elements in campaign design: party identification, front grouping, and sequencing of engagement.

Main Results:

A multifront negotiation campaign can be significantly more effective than direct negotiation for achieving complex outcomes.
The PMA's successful negotiation campaign aligned diverse stakeholders, leading to the adoption of new technologies and a mutually beneficial agreement.
Strategic sequencing and management of multiple negotiation fronts are key to campaign success.

Conclusions:

Negotiation campaigns offer a powerful strategic alternative for complex, multi-party deals.
Successful campaigns require careful planning, stakeholder alignment, and adaptive engagement across different fronts.
This approach is applicable to both high-stakes megadeals and smaller-scale agreements, such as product approvals.