1 / 15

Can Electronic Communication Technology Improve The Outcome Of Negotiation?

Can Electronic Communication Technology Improve The Outcome Of Negotiation?. Anna S. Emmanuel E. Georgie B.

angelc
Download Presentation

Can Electronic Communication Technology Improve The Outcome Of Negotiation?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Can Electronic Communication Technology Improve The Outcome Of Negotiation? Anna S. Emmanuel E. Georgie B.

  2. “Technologies…are playing an increasingly important role in decision making by facilitating communication, collaboration, and coordination among workers at a single as well as dispersed locations” (Shirani et al. 1999).

  3. Definitions • Negotiation- “joint decisions by parties with different preferences” (Bazerman, 2002) • Collaboration- “the interaction among a number of people to achieve a single goal or set of goals” (Collins dictionary)

  4. Communication “Communication involves the use of symbols” (Gudykunst & Kim 1984) • Symbols NOT limited to words. • 60% of communication nonverbal 2-levels of interpretation: content & context (Watzlawick, Beavin and Jackson 1967) Influences on effective communication: -Feedback -Multiple cues (Valacich & Schwenk 1995)

  5. Mediums of communication

  6. Face-2-face vs. Electronic • Immediate two way flow of information • Access to non verbal cues = less potential for misunderstandings • Personal contact = TRUST • Anonymity = Extreme – Unconventional – Risky decisions • (Kiesler & Sproull, 1992) • More delays • Satisfaction

  7. Face-2-face vs. Electronic… continued • Cross-border communication • Anonymity • History of offer exchanges • Time • Eliminate -ve affective cues (Carmel et al. 1993) • Supportive software

  8. Case Study • Tan, Bretherton & Kennedy (2004) The University of Melbourne & International Conflict Resolution Centre • Mediums of communication: • Synchronous computer conferencing • E-mail • Face-to-face

  9. Case Study • Study examined successful negotiation outcome 2 Styles: -Integrative: collaborative and multilateral -Distributive: competitive and unilateral • Hypothesis: Face-to-face highest integrative results and e-mail lowest integrative results • Method: -Role play negotiation (N=98) -Three groups & different time frames

  10. Results Tan, Bretherton, Kennedy (2004)

  11. Conclusion • Case study suggests that the negative effects of e-negotiation are overestimated • Richness of medium is reduced with e-negotiations • Limitations

  12. The Future… • Further developments in video-conferencing, multiple mediums, supportive software • Context specific medium of communication • Reducing the digital divide – access for all

  13. “As organisations respond to the globalisation of markets by expanding around the world, face-to-face communications will have to give way to technology mediated communications.” (Moore et al, 1999)

  14. References • Bazerman, M.H. (2002). Judgement in Managerial decision Making (5th edition). Chichester, John Wiley & Sons. • Carmel, E, Herniter, B.C. & Nunamaker, J.F. (1993) Labour-Management Contract Negotiations in an electronic meeting room: A case study, Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 2, pp. 27-60. • Gudykunst, W.B. & Kim, Y.Y. (1984) Communicating with Strangers. An approach to intercultural communication, New York, Random House. • Kiesler, S & Sproull, L. (1992) Group Decision Making and Communication Technology, Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 52, pp. 96-123.

  15. Moore, D.A., Kurtzberg, T.R., & Thompson, L.L. (1999). Long and Short Routes to success in electronically negotiations: group affiliations and good vibrations. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 77, No. 1, January, pp. 22-43. • Shirani, A.I., Tafti, M.H.A., & Affisco, J.F.(1999) Task and technology fit: a comparison of two technologies for synchronous and asynchronous group communication. Information & Management, Vol. 36, January, pp. 139-150. • Tan, J., Bretherton, D., & Kennedy, G. (2004). Negotiating Online. http://www.odr.info/unforum2004/tan.htm • Valacich, J.S. & Schwenk, C. (1995) Devil’s Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry Effects on Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 63, No. 2, August, pp. 158-173. • Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. and Jackson, D. (1967) The Pragmatics of Human Communication, New York, Norton.

More Related