Handshaking Promotes Cooperative Dealmaking

Handshaking Promotes Cooperative Dealmaking, according to a paper, by University of Chicago and Harvard business school professors.  The abstract:

Humans use subtle sources of information — like nonverbal behavior — to determine whether to act cooperatively or antagonistically when they negotiate. Handshakes are particularly consequential nonverbal gestures in negotiations because people feel comfortable initiating negotiations with them and believe they signal cooperation (Study 1). We show that handshakes increase cooperative behaviors, affecting outcomes for integrative and distributive negotiations. In two studies with MBA students, pairs who shook hands before integrative negotiations obtained higher joint outcomes (Studies 2a and 2b). Pairs randomly assigned to shake hands were more likely to openly reveal their preferences on trade-off issues, which improved joint outcomes (Study 3). In a fourth study using a distributive negotiation, pairs of executives assigned to shake hands were less likely to lie about their preferences and crafted agreements that split the bargaining zone more equally. Together, these studies show that handshaking promotes the adoption of cooperative strategies and influences negotiation outcomes.

Zero-sum Negotiation vs. "Value Can be Created"

Victorian Pynchon well states fundamental points when she writes "The key is not technique but general negotiation principles (such as, ‘value can be created,’ or ‘it is important to understand how parties’ interests interrelate’)....The first step to a successful mutual-benefit negotiation style is to stop thinking about give and take as a zero-sum game. "

Grow the Pie by Timing Payments

Good negotiators find ways to increase value by making deals that give each side its high priorities while making concessions on that party's low priorities. 

I like to call this "positive-sum" negotiating, while some others like to call it "integrative bargaining" or "problem-solving negotiation." 

Whatever one calls it, a common way to do it is by considering different ways to time payments of money.   Karass gives short examples.

Negotiation Theory and Empirical Data

New article by Missouri Law Professor John Lande on Negotiation Theory, with empirical data

A Framework for Advancing Negotiation Theory: Implications from a Study of How Lawyers Reach Agreement in Pretrial Litigation

Lande argues that "The prevailing negotiation theory tries to fit lots of square pegs into just two round holes - adversarial or cooperative bargaining."

Integrative Negotiation

Stephen Futeral's nice summary of a core concept of negotiation theory: integrative negotiation: " In integrative negotiation, the parties: (1) move away from their positions (“I win! You lose!”) by considering the needs and concerns of the other side; (2) consider the alternatives to NOT reaching a negotiated settlement agreement; (3) use objective criteria; (4) focus on the problems and NOT the persons involved; and (5) think creatively."

Futeral's statement "in law school, lawyers are taught many things, but the art of negotiation isn’t one of them" is unfortunately, still too true.  Many of us law professors teach negotiation as a standalone course or as part of an ADR course but there's still a big gap between the importance of negotiation in law practice and the extent to which it's taught and practiced in legal education.