A BEHAVIOURAL MODEL OF PROBLEM‐SOLVING IN LABOUR NEGOTIATIONS*
| Date | 01 July 1976 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1976.tb00048.x |
| Author | L. N. Tracy,R. B. Peterson |
| Published date | 01 July 1976 |
British Journal
of
Industrial Relations
Vol.
XIV
No.
2
A BEHAVIOURAL MODEL OF PROBLEM-SOLVING IN LABOUR
NEGOTIATIONS*
R.
B.
PETERSON?
AND
L. N.
TRACY$
OVER the years a considerable body of literature has emerged dealing with the
bargaining process. Most of this descriptive and prescriptive literature has
focused upon conceptual models and theory building rather than empirical
testing.
A
review suggests that the models and theories may be divided into three
major groupings.
First, we have the economic models in which collective bargaining is seen as a
rational decision-making process. The work of Pigou,’ Zeuthen,* and Nash3 are il-
lustrative of this body
of
literature. The models of Pen4 and
Cross5
represent a
second major grouping. Though emphasising economic variables, they also
recognise the role of non-economic, emotional factors in the bargaining process.
Finally, in more recent years, several behavioural models of bargaining have been
advanced which emphasise the sociological and psychological dimensions of
bargaining behaviour. The works of Stevens: Karrass,’ and Walton and McKer-
sies are representative of this viewpoint.
The Walton and McKersie model represents the most detailed identification of
behavioural and procedural variables associated with collective bargaining. The
four aspects (distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining, attitudinal struc-
turing, and intraorganisational bargaining) of their model refer to four major
goals towards which strategy and tactics are directed in negotiations. In dis-
tributive bargaining the negotiator’s goal is to divide a fixed sum in such a way
that his side will receive the largest possible share. In integrative bargaining the
goal is to make concessions
or
solve problems
in
such a way as to benefit both
sides
or
at least to increase the sum of benefits. Attitudinal structuring is directed
towards maintaining
or
changing the ongoing relationship between the negotiating
parties. The techniques of attitudinal structuring may be used in distributive
or
in-
tegrative bargaining. Finally, intraorganisational bargaining has the purpose of
marshalling the negotiating team and its constituents into a unified stance on the
team’s goals, strategies and
tactic^.^
Though Walton and McKersie’s book,
A
Behavioral Theory
of
Labor
Negotiations,
is widely cited in the literature on collective bargaining, we are un-
aware of any empirical tests of part
or
all their bargaining models.
Our
interest in
their theory rests primarily with those factors that Walton and McKersie identify
with integrative (problem-solving) bargaining. However, because of the inter-
actions among the four sub-processes, additional factors identified with at-
titudinal structuring and intraorganisational bargaining also must be considered.
Our
research is concerned with identifying conditions, behaviours, and pro-
cedures that enhance problem-solving in labour negotiations. In
so
doing, we
might provide indications of situations
or
actions most appropriate for improving
labour-management relations as well as factors that retard problem-solving. A
*
The research
on
which this article is based was funded by a contract from the Office
of
Labor-
Management Services Administration in the
U.S.
Department of Labor to the first author. The
views expressed herein are those
of
the authors and do not necessarily represent the views
of
the
Department of Labor.
t
Associate Professor in the Graduate School
of
Business Administration at the University
of
Washington.
$
Associate Professor in the College
of
Business Administration at Ohio University.
159
To continue reading
Request your trial