Article Summary of "Negotiating in the International Context" by Daniel Druckman
Citation: Daniel Druckman, "Negotiating in the International Context" in Peacemaking in International Conflict: Methods and Techniques, eds. I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen, Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1997, pp. 81-124.
This Article Summary written by: Conflict Research Consortium Staff
Four frameworks dominate
research on negotiation. Druckman briefly describes each. He then outlines some
of the points of agreement among the frameworks, and considers the usefulness of
frameworks generally. The essay concludes by suggesting ways to make scholarly
research relevant to the practitioner.
Game and decision theory views negotiation as a form of
puzzle solving. Research employs scenarios such as the Prisoner's Dilemma, and
focuses on how individuals make decisions under conditions of uncertainty, or
when the choices are contingent on other people's actions. Other research views
negotiation as a bargaining game, and focuses on when and why parties make
concessions. Organization theorists approach negotiation as a form of
organizational management, emphasizing complex communication among multiple
parties. International relations scholars see negotiation as diplomatic
politics, and focus attention on ways that political context affects
negotiation.
Taken together, these different perspectives yield a
comprehensive view of negotiation. They describe negotiations as proceeding in
stages. They recognize the existence of turning points--windows of opportunity
where negotiations can be taken to the next level. The organizational approach
recognizes that negotiators may occupy several roles at once. Negotiators may
suffer from boundary role conflict, when the demands of their various roles are
opposed or inconsistent. International negotiators are often caught between
their role as an advocate for their constituencies, and as a negotiator
committed to reaching a mutually acceptable outcome.
The international relations model stresses the place of
prenegotiation preparation in shaping the course of subsequent negotiations. A
wide range of experiments have shown the significance of framing, that is, of
how the parties perceive the conflict, their opponent, and their own options.
Negotiation includes a bargaining phase. Researchers have evaluated concession
strategies, and have identified starting mechanisms for initiating
concession-making. They have identified variables that affect bargaining
behavior, including the presence of "non-negotiable" values.
Theoretical frameworks are useful for drawing together
experimental data into a more comprehensive, unified view. Frameworks can be
used to design more complex and realistic experimental scenarios. Frames guide
comparative and qualitative case analyses, by suggesting which elements of cases
are most relevant to developing a deeper understanding. Frameworks can yield
predictions of negotiation behavior and outcomes. Expanded negotiations
frameworks are also being used to guide post-settlement activities.
Druckman offers three suggestions for making research
relevant to practitioners: "include in the research variables over which
policymakers have some control, do not define concepts at too high a level of
abstraction, seek conditional generalizations."(p. 110) He notes that the
research techniques of content analysis and decision analysis offer useful tools
to the negotiation practitioner. Research groups have also developed computer
programs that offer diagnostic and decision support tools. Research has given
negotiators improved understanding of the role of emotion in negotiation, and
similarly improved understanding of the impact of cultural differences on
negotiations. Researchers have also developed training methods for negotiating
across cultural differences.
|