"Dickering"
redirects here. For the wapentake of the historic East Riding of Yorkshire, see Dickering
Wapentake.
Bargaining or haggling is
a type of negotiation in which
the buyer and seller of a good or service dispute the price which will be paid
and the exact nature of the transaction that will take place, and eventually
come to an agreement. Bargaining is an alternative pricing strategy to fixed prices. Optimally, if
it costs the retailer nothing to engage and allow bargaining, he can divine the
buyer's willingness to spend. It allows for capturing more consumer surplus as it
allows price
discrimination, a process
whereby a seller can charge a higher price to one buyer who is more eager (by
being richer or more desperate). Haggling has largely disappeared in parts of
the world where the cost to haggle exceeds the gain to retailers for most
common retail items. However, for expensive goods sold to uninformed buyers
such as automobiles, bargaining
can remain commonplace.
Dickering refers to the same process,
albeit with a slight negative (petty) connotation.
Bargaining is also the name chosen for
the 3rd stage of the Kübler-Ross model (commonly known as the stages of dying), even though
it has nothing to do with price negotiations.
Contexts where bargaining is allowed
Not all transactions are open to
bargaining. Both religious beliefs and regional custom may determine whether or
not the seller is willing to bargain.
Regional differences
In
North America and Europe bargaining is restricted to expensive or one-of-a-kind
items (automobiles, jewelry, art, real estate, trade sales of businesses) and
informal sales settings such as flea markets and garage sales. In other regions
of the world bargaining may be the norm even for small commercial transactions.
In
Indonesia and elsewhere in Asia where locals haggle for goods and services
everywhere from street markets to hotels, haggling is a strong cultural
tradition that even children learn from a young age. Participating in that
tradition can make foreigners feel accepted. Haggling for food items is
strongly discouraged in Southeast Asia and is considered an insult, because
food is seen a common necessity that is not to be treated as a tradable good.
In
almost all large complex business negotiations, a certain amount of bargaining
takes place. One simplified 'western' way to decide when it's time to bargain
is to break negotiation into 2 stages: creating value and claiming value.
Claiming value is another phrase for bargaining. Many cultures take offence
when they perceive the other side as having started bargaining too soon. This
offence is usually as a result of their wanting to first create value for
longer before they bargain together. The Chinese culture by contrast places a
much higher value on taking time to build a business relationship before
starting to create value or bargain. Not understanding when to start bargaining
has ruined many an otherwise positive business negotiation.
In
areas where bargaining at the retail level is common, the option to bargain
often depends on the presence of the store's owner. A chain store managed by
clerks is more likely to use fixed pricing than an independent store managed by
an owner or one of owner's trusted employees.
The
store's ambiance may also be used to signal whether or not bargaining is
appropriate. For instance, a comfortable and air-conditioned store with posted
prices usually do not allow bargaining, but a stall in a bazaar or marketplace may. Supermarkets and other
chain stores almost never allow bargaining. However, the importance of ambiance
may depend on the cultural commitment to bargaining. In Israel, prices on
day-to-day items (clothing, toiletries) may be negotiable even in a Western
style store manned by a clerk.
In India, a sign posted with the phrase fixed price indicates
that bargaining is not allowed, although quite often this is not the case.
Theories
Behavioral theory
The
personality theory in bargaining emphasizes that the type of personalities
determine the bargaining process and its outcome. A popular behavioral theory
deals with a distinction between hard-liners and soft-liners. Various research
papers refer to hard-liners as warriors, while soft-liners are shopkeepers. It
varies from region to region. Bargaining may take place more in rural and
semi-urban areas than in a metro city.
Game theory
Bargaining games refer to
situations where two or more players must reach agreement regarding how to
distribute an object or monetary amount. Each player prefers to reach an
agreement in these games, rather than abstain from doing so; however, each
prefers that agreement which most favours his interests. Examples of such
situations would be the bargaining involved in a labour union and the directors
of a company negotiating wage increases, the dispute between two communities
about the distribution of a common territory or the conditions under which two
countries can start a program of nuclear disarmament. Analyzing these kinds of
problems looks for a solution specifying which component in dispute will
correspond to each party involved.
Players
in a bargaining
problem can
bargain for the objective as a whole at a precise moment in time. The problem
can also be divided so that parts of the whole objective become subject to
bargaining during different stages.
In a classical bargaining problem the
result is an agreement reached between all interested parties, or the status
quo of the problem. It is clear that studying how individual parties make their
decisions is insufficient for predicting what agreement will be reached.
However, classical bargaining theory assumes that each participant in a
bargaining process will choose between possible agreements, following the
conduct predicted by the rational choice model. It is particularly assumed that
each player's preferences regarding the possible agreements can be represented
by a von
Neumann–Morgenstern utility theorem function.
Nash
[1950] defines a classical bargaining problem as being a set of joint
allocations of utility, some of which will correspond to what the players would
obtain if they reach an agreement, and another which represents what they would
get if they failed to do so.
A
bargaining game for two players is defined as a pair (F,d) where F is the set
of possible joint utility allocations (possible agreements), and d is the
disagreement point.
For the definition of a specific
bargaining solution it is usual to follow Nash's proposal, setting out the
axioms this solution should satisfy. Some of the most frequent axioms used in
the building of bargaining solutions are efficiency, symmetry, independence of
irrelevant alternatives, scalar invariance, monotonicity, etc.
The Nash
bargaining solution is the bargaining solution which maximizes the product of an agent's
utilities on the bargaining set.
The
Nash bargaining solution, however, only deals with the simplest structure of
bargaining. It is not dynamic (failing to deal with how pareto outcomes are
achieved). Instead, for situations where the structure of the bargaining game
is important, a more mainstream game theoretic approach is useful. This can
allow players' preferences over time and risk to be incorporated into the
solution of bargaining games. It can also show how the details can matter. For
example the Nash bargaining solution for Prisoners'
Dilemma is
different from the Nash equilibrium.
Bargaining and posted prices in retail markets
Retailers
can choose to sell at posted prices or allow bargaining: selling at a public
posted price commits the retailer not to exploit buyers once they enter the
retail store, making the store more attractive to potential customers, while a
bargaining strategy has the advantage that it allows the retailer to price
discriminate between different types of customer. In some markets, such as
those for automobiles and expensive electronic goods, firms post prices but are
open to haggling with consumers. When the proportion of haggling consumers goes
up, prices tend to rise.
Processual theory
This
theory isolates distinctive elements of the bargaining chronology in order to better understand the complexity of the
negotiating process. Several key features of the processual theory include:
·
Bargaining range
·
Critical risk
·
Security point
Integrative theory
Integrative
bargaining (also called "interest-based bargaining," "win-win
bargaining") is a negotiation strategy in which parties collaborate to
find a "win-win" solution to their dispute. This strategy focuses on
developing mutually beneficial agreements based on the interests of the disputants.
Interests include the needs, desires, concerns, and fears important to each
side. They are the underlying reasons why people become involved in a conflict.
"Integrative
refers to the potential for the parties' interests to be [combined] in ways
that create joint value or enlarge the pie." Potential for integration
only exists when there are multiple issues involved in the negotiation. This is
because the parties must be able to make trade-offs across issues in order for
both sides to be satisfied with the outcome.
Narrative theory
A
very different approach to conceptualizing bargaining is as co-construction of
a social narrative, where narrative, rather than economic logic drives the
outcome.
Automated bargaining
When
a bargaining situation is complex, finding Nash equilibrium will be difficult
using game theory. Evolutionary
computation methods
have been designed for automated bargaining, and demonstrated efficient and
effective for approximating Nash equilibrium.
Anchor Pricing
Anchor
price is the first call that is made during a bargain. Due to the first call a
condition of biased pricing is set which tilts the bargain towards the first
caller.
See also
References
4.
^ Wang, Ruqu (1995). Bargaining
versus posted-price selling, European Economic Review, 39(9), 1747-1764
5.
^ Gill, David and Thanassoulis, John
(2009). The impact of bargaining on markets with price takers: Too many
bargainers spoil the broth, European Economic Review, 53(6), 658-674
Further reading
The
articles in the list were not used in the creation of this article, but provide
further background information on the topic. If you are reading this article,
and have access to these sources, please consider editing this article and
adding references from these sources. -- if you've added a reference, please
remove the article from this section.
·
Uchendu, Victor. "Some Principles of Haggling in Peasant
Markets." in Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 16, No. 1
(Oct., 1967), pp. 37–50.
·
Ethnographic analysis of tourists haggling for souvenirs: Gillespie, A.
(2007). In the other we trust: Buying souvenirs in Ladakh, North India, Academia.edu.
·
On bargaining theory: Abhinay
Muthoo. "Bargaining Theory with
Applications", Cambridge
University Press, 1999.
·
On automated bargaining: Tim Gosling, Nanlin Jin & Edward Tsang, Games, supply chains and automatic
strategy discovery using evolutionary computation, in J-P. Rennard (Eds.), Handbook of
research on nature-inspired computing for economics and management, Vol II,
Chapter XXXVIII, Idea Group Reference, 2007, 572-588
No comments:
Post a Comment