Negotiation in Small Groups

Elizabeth A. Mannix*, Leigh L. Thompson, Max H. Bazerman

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

76 Scopus citations


The impact of issue agendas, decision rule, and power balance on the quality of negotiated agreements in small groups was examined. Three-person groups negotiated an agreement on three issues, with each issue having five alternative levels. Groups using sequential agendas were less likely to achieve mutually beneficial agreements than groups using package agendas. Groups following sequential agendas under majority rule achieved significantly less beneficial agreements than did groups following sequential agendas/unanimous rule, package agendas/majority rule, or package agendas/unanimous rule. As the predetermined alternatives to a negotiated agreement increased, so did individual profit. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for the quality of decision making in mixed-motive small groups.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)508-517
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jun 1989

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Negotiation in Small Groups'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this