The Long‐Term Impact of Negotiation Training and Teaching Implications

• Author: Arnaud Stimec,Nicolas Antheaume,Cherine G. Soliman
• Date: 01 December 2014
• Published date: 01 December 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21110

C R Q, vol. 32, no. 2, Winter 2014 129

© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the Association for Confl ict Resolution

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21110

The Long-Term Impact of Negotiation Training

andTeaching Implications

Cherine G. Soliman

Arnaud Stimec

Nicolas Antheaume

 is article presents the subset of research on the enhancement of cooper-

ation in negotiation with a focus on the intraorganizational context. It

studies the long-term eff ect of negotiation training and its implications

for the teaching of negotiation. We chose a qualitative approach over

two cycles of action research. Cycle 1 was performed in a training course

with sixty-four managers over six months. Cycle 2, using the focus group

method, was carried out with eleven individuals selected from cycle 1

population over twelve months.  is experiment enabled us to propose a

dynamic typology of negotiator styles, which led us to suggest a number

of recommendations to improve the teaching of negotiation.

W hatever defi nition is given of negotiation, most scholars insist on two

dimensions (Deutsch 1973; Schelling 1980; Walton and McKersie

1965): cooperation and competition. If negotiation were only cooperation,

it would be a sheer problem-solving issue. And if negotiation were only

competition, it would be just a struggle. When no party is absolutely domi-

nant or independent of the other but when interests and intents are not 100

percent convergent, negotiation appears to be a serious option (Dupont

1994). Negotiation is characterized by the coexistence of cooperative and

competitive issues that create a dilemma (Lax and Sebenius 1986).

 is dilemma may be driven by the context (e.g., in game theory) or by

the negotiators’ behaviors (e.g., in social psychology research).  e analysis

of context and the knowledge of negotiation techniques may help to choose

the right behaviors.  is is why most negotiation training courses associate

130 SOLIMAN, STIMEC, ANTHEAUME

C R Q • DOI: 10.1002/crq

the two issues of context analysis and behaviors through simulations or case

analysis. An underlying assumption, rarely discussed, is that people are free

to adopt whatever style they believe is best.  is opens the way to one-size-

fi ts-all negotiation trainings where trainees would learn the one best way.

How far are people able to switch from one negotiation style to another?

What type of training is required to favor this change? How do diff erent

individuals react to the training? How do behaviors adjust to reality after

a training session? Since most training courses do not include a longitu-

dinal follow-up, we do not have answers to these questions. To address

these issues, an eighteen-month, two-cycle, action research training was

designed and conducted with Egyptian middle- to top-level managers who

had enrolled for evening MBA or DBA classes.

We designed a training course based on recommendations from the lit-

erature. We identifi ed negotiator style prior to, during, and after the train-

ing. We tested the impact of three variables on these styles: (1) the impact

of negotiation knowledge (through the train ing), (2) the impact of com-

ing back to the organizational environment after the training, and (3) the

impact of time (six months for cycle 1, another twelve months for cycle 2).

We begin with an investigation of training design issues that we identi-

fi ed in the literature. We then explain how we designed the training and

measured negotiator profi les and the impact of our three variables.  is is

followed by a presentation and analysis of our results. Finally, we discuss

how our research contributes to understanding negotiator profi les and the

implications for teaching negotiation.

Teaching How to Manage Cooperation and Competition

inNegotiations

Almost all negotiation manuals or training courses address the issue of

cooperation and competition. Unfortunately, it is not always clearly stated

if this is related to context analysis, individual profi les, or a mix of the two.

Moreover, teaching often takes for granted that this choice between coop-

eration and competition is a question of knowledge and rational choice

and that the context is stable.

From Dual Concerns to Dual Contexts

In this section, we distinguish attitudes and behavioral work and con-

text analysis research (although they may be handled simultaneously),

two complementary approaches.  e fi rst stream of research focuses on