Directive use in negotiation interaction

Abstract

This study examined how conversational directives expand strategically in negotiation interaction. The directive expansions were examined in relationship to four contextual parameters that are most influential in structuring communication choices in negotiation: participant goals and interests, the negotiation procedures, relational history of the negotiators, and the topic or issue consuming the interaction. Findings revealed that when participant goals are discrepant and a less cooperative context is apparent, when the procedures for conducting the negotiation are not as rigid, when participants have a substantial relational history, and when the negotiation content is personally involving, then more face‐threatening directives are used. The significance of these results is discussed with respect to the value of focusing on directives as a means of learning how the negotiation of information influences the negotiation over specific outcome proposals.

Notes

William A. Donohue is Associate Professor of Communication at Michigan State University, and Mary E. Diez is Assistant Professor of Professional Communication at Aluerno College. This research was partially supported by a grant from the Michigan Civil Service Commission.