Multiparty negotiations are a unique context in which three or more parties have different issues, priorities, and underlying interests. The Football Stadium Expansion is a four-person negotiation exercise that reinforces distributive and integrative negotiation skills (e.g., recognizing priorities, making concessions) as well as introduces three negotiation skills necessary for a multiparty context: coalition forming, decision agreement rules, and straw votes. Using a setting familiar to both students and community members—an expansion of a campus football stadium—this exercise is ideal for classes or trainings with a 50- or 75-minute limit.
BeersmaB.De DreuC. K. (2002). Integrative and distributive negotiation in small groups: Effects of task structure, decision rule, and social motive. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 227-252.
2.
Bruni-BossioV.WillnessC. (2016). The “Kobayashi Maru” meeting: High-fidelity experiential learning. Journal of Management Education, 40, 619-647.
3.
DavisJ. H.StassonM. F.OnoK.ZimmermanS. (1988). Effects of straw polls on group decision making: Sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 918-926.
4.
DeliseL. A.MelloA. L. (2017). Designing the widget: A group decision and negotiation task. Management Teaching Review, 2, 55-79.
5.
DeMarrB. J.De JanaszS. C. (2019). Negotiation and dispute resolution. Chicago, IL: Chicago Business Press.
6.
FisherJ.Fisher-YoshidaB. (2017). Educating negotiators: Using theory, practice, case studies, and simulations in an integrated learning experience. Negotiation and Conflict Management, Research, 10, 286-305.
7.
JangD.ElfenbeinH.BottomW. (2017). More than a phase: Form and features of a general theory of negotiation. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1). doi:10.5465/annals.2016.0053
8.
KolbD. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press.
9.
LewickiR. J. (1997). Teaching negotiation and dispute resolution in colleges of business: The state of the practice. Negotiation Journal, 13, 253-269.
10.
LewickiR. J.BarryB.SaundersD. M. (2016). Essentials of negotiation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
11.
MannixE. A.ThompsonL. L.BazermanM. H. (1989). Negotiation in small groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 508-517.
12.
OlekalnsM.BrettJ. M.WeingartL. R. (2003). Phases, transitions and interruptions: Modeling processes in multi-party negotiations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 14, 191-211.
13.
ParkG.DeShonR. P. (2018). Effects of group-discussion integrative complexity on intergroup relations in a social dilemma. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 146, 62. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.04.001
14.
PolzerJ. T.MannixE. A.NealeM. A. (1998). Interest alignment and coalitions in multiparty negotiation. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 42-54.
15.
ThompsonL. L.MannixE. A.BazermanM. H. (1988). Group negotiation: Effects of decision rule, agenda, and aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 86-95.
16.
ThompsonL.PetersonE.BrodtS. E. (1996). Team negotiation: An examination of integrative and distributive bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 66-78.
17.
van BeestI.SteinelW.MurnighanJ. K. (2011). Honesty pays: On the benefits of having and disclosing information in coalition bargaining. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 738-747.
18.
WeingartL. R.BennettR. J.BrettJ. M. (1993). The impact of consideration of issues and motivational orientation on group negotiation process and outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 504-517.
