Negotiation Journal

The Negotiation Journal is a multidisciplinary international journal devoted to the publication of works that advance the theory, analysis, practice, and instruction of negotiation and dispute resolution.

The journal is committed to the development of better strategies for resolving differences through the give-and-take process of negotiation. Negotiation Journal’s eclectic, multidisciplinary approach reinforces its reputation as an invaluable international resource for anyone interested in the practice, analysis, and teaching of negotiation, mediation, and conflict resolution including:

  • educators,
  • esearchers,
  • diplomats,
  • lawyers,
  • business leaders,
  • labor negotiators,
  • government officials, and
  • mediators.

The kinds of articles that appear in the Journal range from brief columns reporting or commenting on interesting ideas to research reports; from analytic descriptions of negotiation practice to essays aimed at building negotiation theory; from integrative book reviews to accounts of educational innovations.

Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld

Managing Editor
Nancy J. Waters

Editor Emeritus
Michael Wheeler

Associate Editors
Daniel Druckman
Carrie Menkel-Meadow

Associate Editor, Education
Melissa Manwaring

Editor’s Note, July 2018:

Thomas Schelling’s extraordinary contributions to conflict theory and practice are the focus of a special section in this issue, which was steered by Guest Editor Daniel Druckman. As Dan notes, the special section honors the work of a colleague who was deeply valued long before he was honored with the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 2005. Indeed, Schelling was present at the founding of the Program on Negotiation. Dan has brought together an exceptional set of contributors in honor of an extraordinary colleague, for which we are profoundly grateful. Dan’s introduction to this special section is comprehensive, so my comments here will be brief.

Oran Young, who served as National Security Advisor in the administration of President John F. Kennedy, leads off the section, reflecting on Tom Schelling’s foundational contributions to our understanding of mixedmotive situations, with a particular focus on the role of commitment tactics on bargaining with long-term cooperation–conflict dynamics. He also describes Tom’s seminal contributions to our understanding of social norms and the ways in which microbehaviors have macroimplications.

In his contribution, Dean Pruitt considers how Tom’s theories shaped research agendas. (In highlighting the central mixed-motive assumption, Pruitt traces a scholarly connection to Morton Deutsch, who was honored with a special section in our January issue.) Pruitt notes the broad scope of Tom’s conceptual legacy and that his ideas have “much more research mileage in them.”

The three tributes that follow are by authors whose scholarly work has been heavily influenced by Tom Schelling: Graham Allison, Aroop Mukharji and Richard J. Zeckhauser, and Marie Chevrier. Mukharji and Zeckhauser consider the relevance of Tom’s work to theories of back channel negotiations in their discussion of the unfolding conflict between the United States and North Korea. Allison describes Tom’s seminal contributions to our understanding of the threat posed by nuclear weapons and how to respond to it. Chevrier chronicles Tom’s impact as both a scholarly mentor and lifelong friend.

In their tribute, Mac Destler and Peter Reuter describe the years Tom spent as their colleague at the University of Maryland, where he taught after he retired from Harvard. The special section concludes with the reprint of two relevant speeches, the first, by Dan Druckman, honored Tom when he was awarded the International Association for Conflict Management (IACM) Life-Time Achievement Award. We conclude with Tom’s own words in the form of his Nobel Laureate speech, which we reproduce with permission from the Nobel Foundation.

In addition to the special section, this issue features a research report by Meriem Kalter, Katalien Bollen, and Martin Euwema on “The Long-Term Effectiveness of Mediating Workplace Conflicts.” Focusing on mediated workplace disputes in the Netherlands, the authors surveyed parties within four weeks of the mediation and then a year afterward. There have been surprisingly few studies that track perceptions of mediation processes and outcomes over time, and this study faced the predictable challenges of collecting matched pairs of data at two points in time. Although the sample is small, the authors obtained sufficient responses to undertake multivariate analysis and draw some interesting conclusions.

They find that short-term measures of mediation effectiveness, such as reported reconciliation, satisfaction with the mediator, satisfaction with the outcome, and trust in the agreement are each predictors of long-term mediation effectiveness. Interestingly, reported satisfaction with the mediation process right after mediation is not a predictor of long-term satisfaction with the mediation process. Unsurprisingly, supervisors reported that they perceived a higher level of compliance with the final agreement than did subordinates, but other measures did not show as many differences according to hierarchy as one might expect.

Holger Janusch contributes an article entitled “The Interaction Effects of Bargaining Power: The Interplay between Veto Power, Asymmetric Interdependence, Reputation, and Audience Costs.” Although sources of bargaining power are analytically distinct, they coexist in real life. This article, which is centered on the role of power in international relations, examines the various ways in which they can interact. The article focuses on rationalistic sources of power and employs the language of game theory in its analysis.

Veto power in international relations, Janusch notes, generally involves the ability of one nation to veto potential cooperation among nations. Veto power assumes, however, that changes in the status quo require the consent of all parties – that all have equal veto ability, such as a multilateral prisoner’s dilemma situation. On the other hand, asymmetric interdependence allows for actors to end international cooperation on a unilateral basis. Stated this way, the concepts seem to be mutually exclusive, but the essay brings in additional forms of power – reputation and audience costs – to explain how the different power dynamics can be observed as co-occurring in international relations. Janusch illustrates his examination of the ways in which veto power, asymmetry, and audience and reputation costs interact by analyzing the Andean free trade negotiations involving Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, and the United States (with the president and Congress as “veto players”). Altogether, this issue looks back to the past and finds guidance for the future.

Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld

Table of Contents

 Editor’s Note
Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld

In Theory

The Interaction Effects of Bargaining Power: The Interplay between Veto Power, Asymmetric Interdependence, Reputation, and Audience Costs
Holger Janusch

Research Report

The Long-term Effectiveness of Mediating Workplace Conflicts
Meriem Kalter, Katalien Bollen, and Martin Euwema

Special Issue: Celebrating Tom Schelling’s Legacy
Daniel Druckman, Guest Editor

Introduction: Tributes to an Extraordinary Career
Daniel Druckman

On Being Rigorous and Relevant: A Tribute to Tom Schelling
Oran R. Young

Tom Schelling’s Contributions to Conflict Theory and Research
Dean G. Pruitt 

Preventing Nuclear War: Schelling’s Strategies
Graham Allison

Back Channel Negotiations and Dangerous Waiting
Aroop Mukharji and Richard J. Zeckhauser

Tom Schelling at Maryland
I.M. (Mac) Destler and Peter H. Reuter

Thomas C. Schelling: Scholar, Teacher, Friend
Marie Isabelle Chevrier

Thomas Crombie Schelling, 2007 IACM Lifetime Achievement Award: An Appreciation
Daniel Druckman

An Astonishing Sixty Years: The Legacy of Hiroshima
Thomas C. Schelling

Online Resources

Visit the Wiley-Blackwell Negotiation Journal homepage to:

• Subscribe
• View the tables of contents of recent editions
• Read the Instructions to Contributors, and more


5 Responses to “Negotiation Journal”

  • h.

    We are a gaggle of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community.
    Your web site provided us with helpful information to
    work on. You’ve done a formidable job and our entire group shall be
    thankful to you.

  • Carlos C.

    Hi! I attended a Negotiation and Dispute Resolution Seminar am PON in 2002. I am from Venezuela and I would like to write an article about the current Venezuelan crisis. To whom shall I speak?

    • Hello,
      I have forwarded you message to Nancy Waters who works on the Negotiation Journal.

  • Vanita V.

    Dear Nancy Waters
    We are Professors of SPJIMR, Mumbai, India. We Prof. Vineeta D and myself, teach negotiation skilss to executives and our students. We refer to a lot of information and articles on PON. We wanted to write a case study (social negotiation) based article in the negotiation journal. Request your advise and help to take this forward.

    • Gail O.

      I have forwarded your message to the person on our team responsible for case studies.


Leave a Reply