Abstract

Interdependent approach study is a new area in negotiation research. A negotiation approach reflects people's predisposition towards conflict resolution. Although there are five single approaches, negotiators tend to use a combination of more than one approach during the negotiation process. Traditionally, researchers use the strongest approach to represent a negotiator's approach profile. However, a negotiator's approach profile is determined typically by the combination of single approaches and the strength of their occurrence measured by the Thomas-Kilmann questionnaire. This is an exploratory study of interdependent approaches. Discovery and specification of the effectiveness of such profiles are the research focus. Approach effectiveness is discussed from two perspectives: first, the numbers of strong approaches included; and second, the profile similarity between negotiators. This study analyzes two datasets from the Inspire e-negotiation system. It shows that negotiation approaches are significantly correlated with each other and most people has one or two strong approaches. Although there is significant evidence that a larger number of strong approaches is more effective in the first dataset, it does not hold in the second, suggesting future studies around this topic; it also finds significant relationship with profile similarity and contract balance, although it does not show in the second dataset. In addition, no significant relationship between profile similarity and opening offer utility is found in both datasets. As an exploratory study, this thesis contributes to the understanding of interdependent negotiation approaches from a new manner