Time Pressure and the Development of Integrative Agreements in Bilateral Negotiations

Abstract

A laboratory experiment examined the effects of time pressure on the process and outcome of integrative bargaining. Time pressure was operationalized in terms of the amount of time available to negotiate. As hypothesized, high time pressure produced nonagreements and poor negotiation outcomes only when negotiators adopted an individualistic orientation; when negotiators adopted a cooperative orientation, they achieved high outcomes regardless of time pressure. In combination with an individualistic orientation, time pressure produced greater competitiveness, firm negotiator aspirations, and reduced information exchange. In combination with a cooperative orientation, time pressure produced greater cooperativeness and lower negotiator aspirations. The main findings were seen as consistent with Pruitt's strategic-choice model of negotiation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bacharach, S. B. and E. J. Lawler (1981) Bargaining: Power, Tactics, and Outcomes. Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Carnevale, P.J. (1986) “Strategic choice in mediation.” Negotiation Journal 2: 45-56.

Carnevale, P.J P. D. Sherer , and D. G. Pruitt (1979) Some determinants of concession rate and distributive tactics in negotiation. Presented at the 87th annual convention of the American Psychological Association, New York, September.

Follett, M. P. (1940) “Constructive conflict,” in H. C. Metcalf and L. Urwick (eds.) Dynamic Administration: The Collected papers of Mary Parker Follett. New York: Harper.

Froman, L. A. , and M. D. Cohen (1970) “Compromise and logroll: comparing the efficiency of two bargaining processes.” Behavioral Sci. 15: 180-183.

Pruitt, D. G. (1981) Negotiation Behavior. New York: Academic.

Pruitt, D. G. and P.J.D. Carnevale (1982) “The development of integrative agreements,” in V. Derlega and J. Grzelak (eds.) Cooperation and Helping Behavior: Theories and Research. New York: Academic.

Pruitt, D. G P.J.D. Carnevale B. Forcey , and M. Van Slyck (1986) “Gender effects in negotiation: constitutent surveillance and contentious behavior.” J. of Experimental Social Psychology 22: 264-275.

Pruitt, D. G. , and J. L. Drews (1969) “The effect of time pressure, time elapsed, and the opponent's concession rate on behavior in negotiation.” J. of Experimental Social Psychology 5: 43-60.

10.

Pruitt, D. G. , and D. F. Johnson (1970) “Mediation as an aid to face saving in negotiation.” J. of Personality and Social Psychology 14: 239-246.

11.

Raiffa, H. (1982) The Art and Science of Negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

12.

Rubin, J. Z. , and B. R. Brown (1975) The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation. New York: Academic.

13.

Smith, D. L. , D. G. Pruitt , and P.J.D. Carnevale (1982) “Matching and mismatching: the effect of own limit, other's toughness, and time pressure, on concession rate in negotiation.” J. of Personality and Social Psychology 42: 876-883.

14.

Walton, R. E. and R. B. Mckersie (1965) A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations: An Analysis of a Social Interaction System. New York: McGraw-Hill.

15.

Wright, P. (1974) “The harassed decision maker: time pressure, distractions, and the use of evidence.” J. of Applied Psychology 59: 555-561.

16.

Yukl, G. A. (1974) “The effects of situational variables and opponent concessions on a bargainer's perceptions, aspirations, and concessions.” J. of Personality and Social Psychology 29: 227-236.

17.

Yukl, G. A. M. P. Malone , B. Hayslip , and T. A. Pamin (1976) “The effects of time pressure and issue settlement order on integrative bargaining.” Sociometry 39: 277-281.