MNGY Dominique van Schagen
Hasselhuhn, M.P.: Support Theory in Negotiation: How Unpacking Aspirations and Alternatives Can
Improve Negotiation Performance
Discussions over how to divide a finite set of resources are ubiquitous.
Some simple but powerful tactics to improve negotiation performance:
- Generating strong alternatives to the current negotiation so that negotiators can set more
aggressive bottom lines à Reservation points
- Focusing on the maximum amount of value negotiators hope to attain from the negotiation à
Aspiration levels
The combination of the negotiator’s own bottom line and the perceived upper limit of his/her
counterpart defines the boundaries within which the negotiation will occur à zone of possible
agreement.
Negotiators with stronger BATNAs set more aggressive bottom lines in terms of the value required
to reach a negotiated agreement. Having strong alternatives is important because:
- They protect a negotiator when a negotiation falls apart
- Gives the negotiator greater power in demanding a better deal in the current negotiation.
The greatest source of uncertainty in negotiations comes from their counterpart: their intentions,
goals, and whether they intend to abide by the terms of the agreement.
An event is considered to be more likely when it is unpacked into components than when it is
considered as a single package. Negotiators who unpack their alternatives will believe they have
attractive options should they walk away from the current negotiation. Negotiators who unpack their
aspirations will believe they can attain a relatively greater settlement from their counterpart.
Study 1: taxicab passenger negotiations
Participants negotiated taxi fares between a common housing
location and the on-campus business school. Before negotiating,
participants made judgments regarding the lowest fare they hoped to
pay. Participants considered these aspiration levels as either a
consolidated set (packed condition) or an unbundled set of the same
possible outcomes (unpacked condition).
Results
Successful participants were evenly distributed between the packed
and the unpacked conditions. Negotiators who unpacked a potential
positive outcome believed the chances that the driver would agree to a
fare below $10.00 were higher compared with negotiators in the packed condition (60.58% vs 86.51%,
see figure above). Negotiators in the unpacked conditions aspired to pay a lower fare than negotiators
in the packed condition.
Discussion
Unpacking negotiation aspirations can improve outcomes compared to when they are a single
package. Negotiators who unpacked their aspirations set higher goals and attained superior outcomes
compared with negotiators who considered a less detailed set of the same possibilities.
Study 2
Participants completed an adapted version of “The Bonus” negotiation exercise. In this negotiation,
a job candidate receives a job offer and is negotiating the offer with the recruiter. Participants were
informed that all offer details have been decided with the exception of the signing bonus. The
negotiation materials provided information regarding aspiration and reservation values. Recruiters
Hasselhuhn, M.P.: Support Theory in Negotiation: How Unpacking Aspirations and Alternatives Can
Improve Negotiation Performance
Discussions over how to divide a finite set of resources are ubiquitous.
Some simple but powerful tactics to improve negotiation performance:
- Generating strong alternatives to the current negotiation so that negotiators can set more
aggressive bottom lines à Reservation points
- Focusing on the maximum amount of value negotiators hope to attain from the negotiation à
Aspiration levels
The combination of the negotiator’s own bottom line and the perceived upper limit of his/her
counterpart defines the boundaries within which the negotiation will occur à zone of possible
agreement.
Negotiators with stronger BATNAs set more aggressive bottom lines in terms of the value required
to reach a negotiated agreement. Having strong alternatives is important because:
- They protect a negotiator when a negotiation falls apart
- Gives the negotiator greater power in demanding a better deal in the current negotiation.
The greatest source of uncertainty in negotiations comes from their counterpart: their intentions,
goals, and whether they intend to abide by the terms of the agreement.
An event is considered to be more likely when it is unpacked into components than when it is
considered as a single package. Negotiators who unpack their alternatives will believe they have
attractive options should they walk away from the current negotiation. Negotiators who unpack their
aspirations will believe they can attain a relatively greater settlement from their counterpart.
Study 1: taxicab passenger negotiations
Participants negotiated taxi fares between a common housing
location and the on-campus business school. Before negotiating,
participants made judgments regarding the lowest fare they hoped to
pay. Participants considered these aspiration levels as either a
consolidated set (packed condition) or an unbundled set of the same
possible outcomes (unpacked condition).
Results
Successful participants were evenly distributed between the packed
and the unpacked conditions. Negotiators who unpacked a potential
positive outcome believed the chances that the driver would agree to a
fare below $10.00 were higher compared with negotiators in the packed condition (60.58% vs 86.51%,
see figure above). Negotiators in the unpacked conditions aspired to pay a lower fare than negotiators
in the packed condition.
Discussion
Unpacking negotiation aspirations can improve outcomes compared to when they are a single
package. Negotiators who unpacked their aspirations set higher goals and attained superior outcomes
compared with negotiators who considered a less detailed set of the same possibilities.
Study 2
Participants completed an adapted version of “The Bonus” negotiation exercise. In this negotiation,
a job candidate receives a job offer and is negotiating the offer with the recruiter. Participants were
informed that all offer details have been decided with the exception of the signing bonus. The
negotiation materials provided information regarding aspiration and reservation values. Recruiters
