The Impact of Computer-Mediated Communication - Research Paper Example

 The Impact of Computer-Mediated Communication Abstract Negotiation is a common practice in most parts of human life. Conflicts and disputes can be settled only through negotiations. As per the early trends negotiations occurred in a face to face environment between two or more parties whereas at present majority of negotiations taking place in the virtual world with the help of computer mediated communications like audio and video chats and online text based communications like e-mails. Face to face negotiations require extensive travelling and lot of preparations which is not compatible in the rapidly expanding current world. Computer related technologies are slowly conquering most of the human activities and the natural world is becoming an e-world slowly. Communicational field is also changing rapidly with the introduction of internet, e-mail, mobile phones etc. Most of the discomfort associated with the face to face communication is not involved in computer mediated communications (CMC) like text based communication or audio/videoconferencing. Computer assisted negotiations are useful for all kinds of irrespective of whether they are extroverts or introverts. Anonymity is the main advantage of online text based communications or negotiations and hence the negotiators can behave more aggressively in such negotiations compared to direct face to face negotiations. Bargaining time will be more in online text based negotiations and the outcomes will also be more satisfactory to both the parties. This paper analyses the needs for understanding the impact of communication media such as computer-mediated communication, precisely text-based communication on negotiation. Introduction Changes are taking place in every aspect of our life because of the immense improvements of technology and scientific advancements. Technological development has attained an all time peak at present and it is developing further and further and we cannot even imagine how it is going to shape the future of the world. Computers, internet and mobile phones have redefined the way of communication and it is possible to communicate with anybody in the world instantly using these technologies. These new technologies are now driving the business world. Even the business negotiations are now utilizing the immense possibilities of Computer-Mediated Communications and Online Text Based Communications. Negotiations are part of life. It is a dialogue between two or more parties intended to resolve disputes and to reach mutual agreements for the mutual benefits. It is an interactive decision-making process in which the parties discus their preferences, and adopt some kind of bargaining strategies in order to persuade others to bring their side. We are always engaged in some kind of negotiations in most of our daily life activities. While talking to somebody, purchasing something, driving, cooking or eating we are negotiating with something. “Negotiation occurs for one of two reasons: 1) to create something new that neither party could do on his or her own or 2) to resolve a problem or dispute between the parties” (Lewicki, Roy & Saunder, 2006, p.3) “Two parties negotiate because they think that they can use some form of influence to get a better deal” (Lewicki, Roy & Saunder, 2006, p.4) It is not possible to be adamant in our approaches while engaged in a negotiation process. Compromise is the best word which can explain the meaning of negotiation process. “Negotiations are often categorized as distributive (win-lose) and integrative (win-win)” (Croson, 1999, p.24) Communication is the core of every negotiation process. In order to convince others strong communication skills are required in a negotiation process. Negotiations were previously happened in the actual presence of the two parties. But as per the current trends, most of the negotiations are taking place in the virtual world (computer assisted world) rather than the real one. “Virtual communication uses communication modes other than face-to-face (FTF) such as telephone, email, or written notes” (Stuhlmacher et al, 2007, p.330) It is easy to communicate in the virtual world than in a real world. Researches strongly suggest that parties negotiating in virtual world achieve better results than parties negotiating face to face. Most of the individuals are more comfortable with the computer assisted communications better than a face to face communication process. And hence they will be more successful in computer mediated negotiation process. Justification of the topic Negotiation is a process in which two parties try to derive maximum benefit from the opposite party. Almost all the business activities are based on some kind of negotiation process. The success of the business depends on how successfully the negotiators negotiate with the opposite party. A good negotiator is always an asset for an organization whereas a bad negotiator may be a liability. High degrees of diplomacy and communication abilities are the prerequisite for a negotiator. As per the early trends, negotiations were taking place, face to face, sitting around a table. But, computer assisted negotiation through video conferencing, e-mails or online chat are the current trends in negotiation process. Apart from oral skills, well structured and well defined writing skills are tested in a computer mediated negotiation process. So the negotiator should have writing skills and computer skills apart from oral skills in such a negotiation process. It is not easy to develop all these skills simultaneously. Conscious efforts from the part of the person who is charge of negotiations in order to succeed in a computer assisted negotiation process. It is difficult for some people to negotiate in a face to face environment. Ego clashes and inferiority-superiority complexes may control most of the face to face negotiation processes. Sometimes, people who are dull in face to face negotiations may be smarter in online negotiations because of the less barriers and boundaries involved in such negotiations. For example, consider a negotiation process between India and Pakistan over the issue of Mumbai terrorist attack issue. Because of the high degree of diplomatic approach it may not be possible for India to convey the message strongly to Pakistan in a direct talk because of the diplomatic barriers. On the other hand computer mediated or online text based negotiations may not have such barriers and it can achieve better results than the direct talk. Text based communication methods have some disadvantages also compared to FtF negotiations. Negotiation process will be meaningful and effective only if it happens FtF either directly or using computer technologies. Thus the challenges of text based negotiation is that how we can incorporate the goods of FtF and CMC’s through text based messages together? Because of the increased popularity and awareness about computer mediated and online text based negotiation process, it is interesting and useful to learn more about these types of negotiation process. This paper analyses computer mediated and online text based negotiation process in detail. General Literature Review –Negotiations Negotiation is a dialogue between two or more parties in order to settle disputes and to reach agreements over an issue relating to the parties in negotiation. It occurs between nations, organizations, in business, and in personal matters and everyday life. Negotiations often conducted in a healthy environment suitable for the parties involved in negotiations. Negotiations may involve several stages, such as greeting, background information exchange, agenda setting, issue discussion, and final agreement formulation, and different media may be used by negotiators to perform different tasks” (YUAN et al 2003, p.107) It is not necessary that all the negotiation process may over in one sitting. In fact, lots of informal negotiations are required before the formal negotiation process begins. These informal negotiations will be conducted at the lower level. For example, before conducting a formal negotiation process between the heads (Presidents or Prime Ministers) of two countries, a variety of informal negotiations will take place between the bureaucrats of the two countries in order to clear the barriers and to smoothen, the negotiation process between the heads of the states. ‘The recent meeting between the Indian and Pakistani Prime ministers in Egypt, on July 15-16 was preceded by lots of informal meeting between the foreign secretaries of the two countries in order to set the agenda of the meetings between the prime ministers of the two neighboring countries’ (DPA, 2009) “Several researchers suggest that negotiation in general has been viewed as a masculine role. Stereotypically masculine traits (strong, dominant, assertive, rational) are seen as more important for negotiation success than stereotypical feminine traits (weak, submissive, intuitive, emotional” (Stuhlmacher et al, 2007, p.331) Negotiations generally occurred in a hard fought environment. It is just like a football cricket game. The striker should shoot or the batsman should hit a boundary whenever they get an opportunity in order to win the matches. Same way opportunism is more prevalent in negotiations also. Males are more suitable to grab the opportunities compared to the females because of the masculine traits of men. “Specifically, research on two-party negotiations suggests that negotiators tend to (a) be more concessionary to a positively framed specification of the negotiation than to a negatively framed specification” (BAZERMAN ET AL, 2000, p.283) Negotiators will analyze the topic of discussion under two perspectives; positives and negatives. Nobody wants to earn negatives and everybody wants the positives and hence in a negotiation process, things which create positive impacts to both the parties will be considered favorably while the things which create negative impacts will be analyzed critically. The thing which brings positive outcome to one party may not bring the same result to the opposite party in most of the negotiation process and too much time will be spent on the negative outcomes of the topic in a negotiation process. “Negotiators’ fairness judgments are not purely objective. Rather, parties tend to overweight the views that favor themselves—resulting in a motivational bias” (BAZERMAN ET AL, 2000, p.284) “Most people view themselves, the world, and the future in a considerably more positive light than reality can sustain. People tend to perceive themselves as being better than others on desirable attributes” (BAZERMAN ET AL, 2000, p.285) Egocentrism is a major factor in a negotiation process. Most of the negotiators will never accept their unawareness about a topic. Even if they are aware of the fact that the right is with the opposite party, they will argue continuously for keeping their interest intact because of egocentrism. In some cases, people will argue loudly and continuously in order to in order to hide their unawareness about a topic. Keeping silence, whenever one doesn’t know much about a topic, will be good in high level diplomatic negotiation process, but in most of the other negotiation process, the silence of one party will be exploited by the other party. Because of the above fact, even when a party doesn’t know much about an issue, he will say something; relevant or irrelevant in order to save his face and his stance. “Positive moods tend to increase negotiators’ tendencies to select a cooperative strategy and enhance their ability to find integrative gains. Angry negotiators are less accurate in judging the interests of opponent negotiators and achieve lower joint gains” (BAZERMAN ET AL, 2000, p.285) Patience and temperament and are some of the basic qualities required for a good negotiator. It is not possible to make the opposite party accept all the arguments. Compromise and consensus is the core of every negotiation process and hence in order to keep the progress of a negotiation process certain things need to be sacrificed in a negotiation process. For example, Indian government has held a stand earlier that peace talks with Pakistan is not possible unless Pakistan arrest and hand over all the suspected terrorists involved in the recent Mumbai attack. But they were forced to change their stand because other countries made India aware that without direct face to face peace talks or negotiations, the issues between India and Pakistan cannot be resolved. Both the parties would like to win in a negotiation process. “The aim of win-win negotiation is to find a solution that is acceptable to both parties, and leaves both parties feeling that they've won, in some way, after the event” (Mind tools.com, 2009) Better negotiation processes will always beneficial to both the parties. The recent 1-2-3 agreement with respect to the nuclear energy cooperation, between US and India, has created immense protests in both the countries. Critiques from both the countries argued that the agreement was against the interests of their countries. Indian critiques argued that India will be forced to allow the US to check their secret nuclear projects whereas the American critiques argued that the supply of nuclear fuels and equipments to India will be used for making nuclear weapons rather than utilizing it for peaceful purposes. It is evident from the equal protests raised in both these counties that the negotiation process was a win-win one in which both the countries have successfully safeguarded their interests. Impact of communication media on negotiation Communication is the core of every negotiation process. The opinions and suggestions of both the parties must be conveyed each other in order to reach mutual agreements. Communication technologies have improved a lot in the current world. Face to face communication was the traditionally used in the negotiation process. But the invention of telephones, fax, internet & email, videoconferencing etc has changed the whole concept of the negotiation process methodologically, theoretically and practically. Virtual world communications enable negotiators to avoid lengthy journeys for the negotiation process. Both face to face and virtual world negotiations have advantages and disadvantages. Face-to-Face negotiations Face to face (FTF) negotiations were the most common and traditional practices in the negotiation process. Even in the current technologically driven world, FTF negotiation has its own identity and importance. In fact critical areas of negotiations use FTF methods rather than the computer mediated or telephonic negotiation methods. Barrier effect theory and psychological distance perspective theory explains why FTF negotiations are more effective compared to the CMC assisted negotiations. “The barrier effect is based on the assumption that eye gaze communicates dominance and that media that allow the exchange of visual gazes will involve less cooperation during negotiation (Stuhlmacher & Citera, 2005, p.71) Eye gaze communicate more things to the opposite party and hence the cooperation in direct FTF will be more compared to the media assisted negotiation. Increased cooperation is essential to arrive at mutual agreements. Conflicts can be rectified only if the negotiators cooperate positively. “FTF negotiation is a strong situation because there are clear norms and expectations for negotiation and social interaction. In contrast, virtual negotiation represents a weak situation because its restrictive bandwidth and reduced social cues provide ambiguity in how to act” (Stuhlmacher et al, 2007, p.331) FTF negotiations are always taking place after in a well prepared environment. Both the parties will do their home works well before going for the FTF negotiations. Both the parties will be prepared to answer the questions from the opposite party and a give and take approach will prevail in a FTF negotiation which will enable both the parties to reach sound agreements. On the other hand virtual communications always keep an ambiguity in the communication which will delay the final agreement further and further. “People talk faster than they write or type. Face to face verbal transaction occur in one session of The information exchanged between a 10 minute face to face transaction will be more compared to that in a computer mediated communication of several hours” (Thompson and Nadler, 2002, p. 112) In a FTF verbal transaction, communication is taking place in different ways. Apart from the verbal transaction, body language and gestures also can communicate lot of things. For example, it is not necessary to say something in order to convey the disapproval of certain things to the opposite party. Shaking of the head in a particular manner can convey the message to the opposite party. Thus, in FTF negotiations more things can be discussed and more ideas can be exchanged than in a virtual communication. “Truth telling is higher in face-to-face negotiations than in other media” (BAZERMAN ET AL, 2000, p.294) Recently, one of my friends has purchased a medicine online. He has negotiated a lot with the product company with respect to the money back guarantee and the cost. The company has offered him initially a 15 day money back guarantee and later they agreed for a 30 day money back guarantee after a brief online negotiation. My friend after using the medicine for a couple of days has developed certain allergic reactions and sent the medicine back to the company demanding his money back as promised by the company. The Singapore based company never responded to his messages and my friend has lost the money. On the other hand, if my friend was able to purchase the same medicine from some of his nearest domestic medical shops, he could have got his money back. Thus, practically, electronic negotiations may not bring the goods always whereas FTF negotiations, in most of the cases, succeed in delivering the goods. Videoconference Videoconferencing used extensively in the modern world for negotiation purposes. It is somewhat similar to a FTF negotiation. The difference is that it occurs in a virtual world. The main advantage of videoconferencing is the avoidance of lengthy business trips for negotiation purposes and still attains the objectives similar to a FTF negotiation through videoconferencing. “Videoconferencing is both synchronous and includes nonverbal and paraverbal cues (though perhaps to a lesser degree than does a face-to-face meeting). One might infer that group decision-making effectiveness when using videoconferencing could be highly similar to that of face-to-face meetings, though even with high-bandwidth systems there are differences between face-to-face and computer-mediated communication patterns” (Baltes et al, 2002, p.174) In FTF negotiations, the negotiators will dine together; go for drinks, etc., in order to develop rapport and to facilitate an easy exchange of objectives. This approach would imply a relationship-orientation, one that tends toward integrative strategies. (LiPera, 1996) In videoconferencing, such rapport building strategies are not possible. Videoconferencing can be a better medium for negotiations than an audio conferencing negotiation, but the advantages of FTF negotiations in a real world context can never be achieved through videoconferencing. In videoconferencing negotiations, power will still play a role, but will be diminished. The primary effect will be that negotiators will be using the medium for either rapport-building or repeated-play negotiations, thus will be more inclined toward integrative strategies. Furthermore, the videoconferencing model will allow for a more level playing field amongst opposing parties. (LiPera, 1996) Videoconferencing can take out the environmental barriers of negotiations. For example, an American may not be interested to travel a climatically hot country like India for some kind of negotiation process. Such persons can uses videoconferencing as a negotiation toll and still attain the advantages of a FTF negotiation. Telephone Telecommunications help people to cross physical social and psychological boundaries as well as how people can meet and make group decisions. (Landry, 2000, p.137) Because of the anonymity in conversations, people will be more comfortable in their conversations using telecommunications. In fact majority of the negotiation processes are still taking place through telephones. The introduction of mobile phones made it possible for the negotiators to communicate each other, anytime, anywhere in the world. Just like face-to-face negotiations full preparation is needed in telephonic negotiations also. It is easy to fell in certain traps if the preparation was not adequate. Concentration of what others are saying and what we are saying is necessary and sufficient condition for a telephonic negotiation. Key points need to be used in telephonic conversation in order to convince the opposite party. Usually, FTF negotiations will precede and followed by a series of telephonic negotiations. FTF negotiations will usually used for the relationship building and formal exchange of ideas whereas, telephonic negotiations used for the informal exchange of ideas. “You need a combination of skills to get good at phone negotiations for international business-to-business sales like Cross-cultural communication skills and the ability to build relationships over the phone (Cindy, 2008) Culture plays an important role in telephonic negotiations. The awareness about the opposite culture will clear the way for negotiations. For example, formalities followed in England and China before and after a conversation may be different and hence the knowledge of such thing will be beneficial to both the parties in order to strengthen their cooperation. Computer mediated communication (CMC) Computer mediated communication using internet, email voice chat and text based instant chats are common practices in the negotiation process in the current technology oriented world. Computer technologies have changed the life principles and methodologies drastically and we can see the influence of computer in most of the segments of human life at present. Anonymity in communication is the major advantage of communicating through computer assisted technologies. “Anonymity is a feature of many text-based conferencing systems that allows group members to contribute to discussions without attaching their names, potentially motivating them to participate differently (BALTES ET AL, 2002, p.160) Anonymity allows participants to feel more secure, thus allowing higher levels of Communication Openness” (BALTES ET AL, 2002, p.172) Some people have difficulties in facing others or talking to others. It doesn’t mean that they are not sharp enough to achieve results in a negotiation process. Such people will be more comfortable if their anonymity is conserved in a negotiation process. For example, psychologically, with respect to the interactions with others, peoples can be classified into two; introvert and extrovert. Introverts always hesitant in dealing with others even if they are brighter compared to their extrovert counterparts. Such people may be a failure in FTF negotiations whereas the same persons may be a big success in electronic negotiation process. “The potential moderator of the effect of CMC vs FTF communication on group effectiveness, satisfaction, and time to decision is anonymity” (BALTES ET AL, 2002, p.160) Another advantage of CMC is its wide reach-ability compared to FTF negotiations. It is possible for a person sitting in his office at London to negotiate with a person sitting in his office at China or Africa. FTF negotiation requires extensive travelling for both the parties to meet at a convenient place which can be avoided using the CMC technologies. It is difficult to implement the CMC approach of negotiations in all negotiation cases. For example, purchasing of a car or a house cannot be done using a CMC approach. Nobody will dare to purchase a vehicle or property only after watching the photographs. Cheating possibilities are more in virtual world negotiations. Because of the anonymity, motivation for malpractices will be more in the electronic world of negotiations. “The psychological distance perspective suggests that virtual media lead to more depersonalization and less social impact than face-to-face interactions because they have fewer informational cues and reduced bandwidth” (Stuhlmacher & Citera, 2005, p.72) A negotiator communicates lot of silent things to the opposite party. The ability and personality of the negotiator communicate so many things to the opposite party about the organization he belongs to whereas in a computer mediated or text based communications, such analysis may not be possible which in turn reduces the effectiveness of the negotiation process. “As the ability to carry nonverbal cues decreases, the ability to effectively communicate complex ideas, thoughts and emotions decrease. Media may also make individuals less aware of others, more aggressive, more task-oriented, less civil, and may create a sense of distance between communicators”  (Cronin & Cai, 2008, p.4) Impact of computer mediated communication on Negotiation Impact of Text based communication on negotiation Text based communication usually make use of emails or instant chats for the negotiation process. The main advantage of such text based negotiation process is that the negotiators will get enough time to formulate and structure their strategies to convince the opposite party. On the other hand the main disadvantage is the time delay in text based communication compared to other communication means like FTF or telephone. “By physically separating individuals, necessitating communication solely by means of typed messages, computer mediation eliminates a wide range of cues” (Arunachalam and Dilla, 1995 p.292) Even an introvert person can use the possibilities of structured text messages for becoming a good negotiator. The need for oral skills like other means of communication can be eliminated in text based communications. It is not necessary that a negotiator may have both written and oral communication skills in good shape. Those who are not confident in their oral skills can make use of text messages in order to convey their stance to the opposite party. Social context is a critical factor in every negotiation process. “Social context influences information exchange through perception, cognitive interpretation, and communication behavior. Social context barriers, such as status differences, will not constrain communication if senders and receivers are unaware of them” (Sproull and Kiesler, 1986, p.1495) In text based negotiations the person who is interacting is not important, but the content of the messages are important. It is difficult to have two parties with same level of contexting in a negotiation process. (Contexting" refers to a strategy of choosing the appropriate mix of verbal and extra verbal communication to get a message across (Contexting & Extraverbal Communication, n.d)) The party with upper hand in communication strategies will dominate in a face to face negotiation process. Thus the party having upper level of contexting will exploit more from the negotiations process and his counterpart may be force to sacrifice his interests. But in a ext based or email based negotiation process, the possibility of such exploitation may be eliminated as both the parties can seek the advice of experts before sending the e-mails. “In a computer-mediated negotiation context, little is known about the effect of an escalated conflict on the strategies or behaviors displayed by the negotiators” (Dorado et al, 2002, p.514) In text based communication, social roles hold less influence on negotiation behaviors for all parties than their FTF counterparts (Stuhlmacher et al, 2007, p.331) Social status often plays a vital role in the FTF negotiations. For example, it is difficult for the manager of a small organization to dominate in a negotiation with another organization, comparatively of high calibre. Moreover, if either of the negotiating party holds better academic and professional credentials than his counterpart, then also healthy negotiation may not take place. The party with low credentials will be tempted to accept the opinions of the other in such situations. But in text based negotiations, all such possibilities will be eliminated and both the parties can engage in a wholehearted approach in their negotiation process. Text based CMC’s can be synchronous and asynchronous, but there are lots of differences between them. Synchronous communication usually occur between two persons having similar cultural backgrounds and hence lot of informal speech and various discourse functions (e.g., requests, responses, apologies, greetings, complaints, and reprimands etc) On the other hand asynchronous communication occur between different cultures and hence lot of planning and utterances required prior to the preparation of the text messages. Planning time is claimed to be crucial for language learners in asynchronous communication. Extra time for comprehending, planning, and producing the messages, the text-based nature of the medium, and the unavailability of nonverbal cues are the most common challenges while negotiating through an asynchronous text based communication process. (KITADE, 2006, p.337) “Asynchronous online discussion was reportedly useful for “encouraging in-depth, more thoughtful discussion” (Johnson, n.d, p.46) Text based communication may be replaced by video conferencing, voice mail or talking mails in future because of the convenience, such conversations possess over text based messages (Lopez and Potter, 2001, p.163) Negotiation process will always be more effective when it take place directly and face to face. The disadvantages of time delay and lengthy planning can be avoided in FtF and moreover fast results can be obtained through FtF. So text based negotiations will attain new shapes in future to incorporate advantages of both the FtF and electronic media negotiations. Text based communication can still be relevant in combination with other communication methods, even if the technology develop far easy methodologies for communication in future. Only the Text based communication can explains statistics and data more clearly than other communication methods. Real-life text based communication has many advantages over other communication methods like more positive impressions about each other (hyper relationship) than those in CMC-primary, CMC-supplemental, or FtF relationships (Ensher et al, 2002, p.278) “In face-to-face interaction, contact initiation is accomplished by encountering each other, establishing mutual eye contact, positioning bodies to enable direct conversation, perhaps pausing, and perhaps using gestures and other nonverbal cues to start a conversation (Tang, 2007, p.6) Such formalities can be avoided in real life text based communication because of the anonymity it provides. It is difficult to start and terminate a FtF conversation whereas it can be easily accomplished using a text based communication method. E-negotiation methods do not address the issues of business adoption of e-negotiation services, such as the cost/value justification, security and privacy considerations etc. (Building Business Models for E-negotiation Services, 2003) A general conclusion about the effects of electronic communication in negotiation is that we know very little about negotiating the resolution of disputes via electronic media (Dorado et al, 2002, p.512) So we have to adopt a mixture of strategies from text based and FtF negotiation strategies for getting better results in future. Both negotiation forms have their advantages and disadvantages. The success of a negotiation process in future depends on how well we are able to incorporate the goods of both these methods. Escalated conflicts in CMC are a common thing. The negotiation process can become complex as it progresses. Sometimes the negotiators feel that they have reduced the gap between them, but on another instant they might feel that the gap has even widened. “In a computer-mediated negotiation context, little is known about the effect of an escalated conflict on the strategies or behaviors displayed by the negotiators” (Dorado et al, p.514, 2002) But is Ftf such escalated conflicts can be better identified and solved. “When a recipient believes that a flame is being employed as part of an intimidation strategy, this may result in an even less favorable evaluation of the flame sender, which further reduces common bonds and associated concession” (Norman J, et al, 2008, p. 420) Pressure tactics is not a good strategy in a negotiation process. Instead of applying flame or pressure, persuasion should be the strategy adopted in order to make the negotiation more meaningful. “Researchers have shown that cultural background shapes values, and values in turn shape behaviors in a number of tasks such as negotiation. Culture also shapes attitudes that impact on how technology is used” (Potter & Balthazard, 2000, p.9) Culture plays an important role in negotiation process irrespective of whether it happens directly through FtF or CMC. The attitudes of the negotiators have strong relationship with their culture. Language, environment, social setups, contexting, authority, non-verbal communications etc can shape the attitude of a person. But these parameters are different in different countries and hence it can play a big role in the negotiation process. “Once people have electronic access, their status, power, and prestige are communicated neither contextually (the ways secretaries, meeting rooms and clothes communicate) nor dynamically (the way gaze, touch and facial and paralinguistic behaviour communicate)” (Greif, 1988, p.662) In a direct FTF negotiations, not only the verbal exchange of ideas, but even the physical appearances, personality and behaviour can influence the opposite party. But in a text based negotiation all such things will be eliminated and the negotiators concentrate only on the content of the message rather than the irreverent physical attributes of the negotiator. Language fluency is a must in FTF communication or negotiation. Both the parties should have sound knowledge in the language used in the negotiation process in order to convey their message to the opposite party effectively. But in text based negotiation, the parties can seek the assistance of others in order to understand the content of the message sent by the opposite party or to type a message to the opposite party. The assistance of electronic technologies will assist the negotiators to convince the points more accurately to the opposite party. Mathematical calculations and reference diagrams, statistical analysis etc can be exchanged more accurately using the text based negotiations compared to the FTF negotiations. “Researchers have found that when groups communicate electronically, they generate more (creative) options for mutual gain” (Croson, 1999, p.25) Electronic communication through text messages provides enough time for the negotiators to think about the subject and hence they can put forward lot of options in the negotiation process whereas a FTF negotiation may take only few minutes which may not be sufficient enough to think about the whole aspects of the negotiating topic. “Email negotiations reduce rapport building” (Thompson and Nadler, 2002, p. 116) Personal meetings are always the better way of building relationships. Emails have their own limitations in strengthening the relationships. Relationship building is accepted as the core of every organizational activity, especially under the current globalized environment. It is difficult to anticipate that some email communication alone may bring the desired results to the negotiating parties. The personal charisma of the negotiating parties plays an important role in relationship building which will be denied if the negotiation process occur purely on computer assisted technologies. Computer mediated negotiation like text based negotiation can experience communication breakdowns that are attributable to the changes in personnel conflicting cognitive orientation and goals, conflicting assessments of the problem etc. (Pour, 2008, p.149) The assessment of the problem may not be effective through a virtual world communication or negotiation process. Text based negotiations always try to exaggerate things and complicate the matters which were discussed in the negotiation. On the other hand FTF negotiation provides little scope for exaggeration conflicting assessments of the problems. “Negotiators are less likely to coordinate on collectively efficient solutions when exchanging written notes than in face-to-face communication, in part because face-to-face negotiators are more likely to reveal truthful information” (Moore et al, 1999, p.5) Because of the certain level of diplomacy and honesty keeping in face to face negotiations, it is difficult for a party to convey wrong messages deliberately in FTF negotiations whereas in a virtual communicational world, anything can happen. The parties can convey wrong messages each other and still they can justify them, citing excuses or wrong interpretations. Dignity is a core issue everybody wants to keep and hence the possibility of deliberate lying is less in a direct face to face negotiation. “Groups using Computer mediated communication (CMC) takes more time to reach agreements than groups in face-to-face discussions” (Croson, 1999, p.25) Lack of social cues, or logistical reasons might be the cause for the delay. In text based messages, people will take extreme care while selecting the language, using the words and selecting the points. All these things are time consuming and moreover, nobody can type messages as fast as they talk. E-mail messages not only need typing, but it requires formatting and proper internet connection for sending. “Computer-mediated communication reduces the communication bandwidth, thereby resulting in fewer exchanges of information; increases anonymity, which could lead to less cooperative behavior and more uninhibited behavior” (Rangaswamy and Shell, 1997, p.1150) Conclusions Negotiations are essential for sustaining the human life in earth. It is not possible to live in this world adamantly. Compromise seems to be the slogan needed for sustaining a healthy life. Compromise can be reached only through proper negotiations. Same person can interact or negotiate differently in the society because of various roles he assumes in the society. Negotiations occur in both real (face to face) and virtual world (computer assisted negotiations through internet and emails). Face to face negotiations always have an upper hand as far as the outcomes are concerned. Gaming or cheating possibilities are more in the virtual or electronic negotiation process whereas face to face negotiations always avoid such things and increases the chances of relationship building. In a rapidly changing world, face to face negotiations possibilities are diminishing because of the complex barriers associated with meeting and conveying messages in person. On the other hand computer mediated negotiations like the text based negotiation can take place any time anywhere in the world. But the main problem associated with such negotiations is the authenticity of the content in the negotiation process. Cheating and gaming possibilities are more in such text based and CMC assisted negotiations and the main question faced by our generation at present is how we can make the technologies and electronic communications more reliable in order to make the e-negotiations more meaningful. References 1. Arunachalam Varam and Dilla William N, (1995), Organizational behaviour and Human Decisions process, Vol. 61, No 3, March 1995, Academic Press 2. Baltes Boris B., Dickson Marcus W., Sherman Michael P., Bauer Cara C., and LaGanke Jacqueline S. (2002), Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.idealibrary.com on 3. Bazerman Max H., Curhan Jared R., Moore Don A., and Valley Kathleen L. NEGOTIATION , Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.arjournals.annualreviews.org 4. Building Business Models for E-negotiation Services, (2003), Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://interneg.concordia.ca/enegotiation/projects/business_models/03report1.html 5. Cindy, (2008), Phone Negotiations, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://getinternationalclients.com/phone-negotiations/ 6. Contexting & Extraverbal Communication, (n.d), Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:ONmmx5paIu8J:www.wheaton.edu/intr/Moreau/courses/562/PDF/02.PDF+Contexting&hl=en 7. Cronin, Daniel & Cai, Deborah, (2008), Computer Mediated Communication and Negotiation: Effects of Media and Power on Relationship Development , Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/5/7/6/7/pages257677/p257677-14.php 8. Croson Rachel T. A. (1999), SIMULATION & GAMING, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://sag.sagepub.com 9. Dorado Miguel A., Medina Francisco J., Munduate Lourdes, Cisneros Inmaculada F. J. and Euwema Martin (2002), Computer-Mediated Negotiation of an Escalated Conflict, Published by: SAGE, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://sgr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/5/509 10. DPA, (2009), Indian and Pakistani prime ministers to meet next week in Egypt, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/276834,indian-and-pakistani-prime-ministers-to-meet-next-week-in-egypt.html 11. Ensher Ellen A., Heun Christian, and Blanchard Anita, (2002) Online mentoring and computer-mediated communication: New directions in research, Journal of Vocational Behavior 63 (2003) 264–288 12. Greif Irene, (1988), Computer-supported Cooperative Work, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=4oVMJ1vi8lkC&oi=fnd&pg=PA657&dq=(computer-mediated+communication+%2B+negotiation)&ots=TPL6y09kff&sig=2oAlnIYAR4e4T26ZJWPuhlEh3vE#v=onepage&q=&f=false 13. Johnson Genevieve Marie, (n.d), Synchronous and Asynchronous Text-Based CMC in Educational Contexts: A Review of Recent Research, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.springerlink.com/content/u33pp8914067x648/fulltext.pdf?page=1 14. KITADE KEIKO, (2006), The Negotiation Model in Asynchronous Computer-mediated Communication (CMC): Negotiation in Task-based Email Exchanges, CALICO Journal, 23 (2), p-p 319-348. 15. Landry Elaine M.(2000), Scrolling Around the New Organization: The Potential for Conflict in the On-Line environment, Negotiation Journal; Apr 2000; 16, 2; ABI/INFORM Global, Plenum publishing corporation 16. LiPera Scott D., (1996), The Impact of New Media: A Model for the Use of Desktop Videoconferencing in Negotiations Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://128.122.253.144/impact/f96/Projects/slipera/ 17. López, José & Potter Garry, (2001), After postmodernism: an introduction to critical realism http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=XLIdPlQIDwUC&pg=PA163&lpg=PA163&dq=real-life+text+based+communication&source=bl&ots=Bq_2DEUsnx&sig=zEjb8aPG0kXf9gLZaqvaUYLejUw&hl=en&ei=YjSaSsrkK566jAfC1KynBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=real-life%20text%20based%20communication&f=false 18. Mind tools.com, (2009)Win-Win Negotiation, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.mindtools.com/CommSkll/NegotiationSkills.htm 19. Moore Don A., Kurtz Terri R., Thompson berg Leigh L. & Morris Michael W.(1999), Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically-Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 20. Potter Richard E. & Potter Pierre A. Balthazar, (2000), Supporting Integrative Negotiation via Computer Mediated Communication Technologies Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t792306871 21. Pour Mehdi Khosrow (2008), Innovative Technologies for Information Resources Management, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=OVv0rCeAfHQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA145&dq=THE+IMPACT+OF+COMMUNICATION+MEDIA+ON+NEGOTIATION+OUTCOMES,+purdy,+J&ots=NJOxxUxrE4&sig=Bbq6dlma-i1z8QgtXfMr6KLcRcc#v=onepage&q=&f=false 22. Rangaswamy Arvind and Shell Richard G., (1997), Using Computers to Realize Joint Gains in Negotiations: Toward an "Electronic Bargaining Table" Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2634576 23. Sproull Lee and Kiesler Sara, (1986), Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communications, Retrieved on 14 August 2009 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2631506 24. Stuhlmacher Alice F., Citera Maryalice & Willis Toni(2007), Gender Differences in Virtual Negotiation: Theory and Research, Published online: 3 July 2007 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2007 25. Stuhlmacher Alice F.& Citera Maryalice (2005) HOSTILE BEHAVIOR AND PROFIT IN VIRTUAL NEGOTIATION: A META-ANALYSIS, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 20, No. 1, Fall 2005 26. TANG JOHN C. (2007), Approaching and Leave-Taking: Negotiating Contact in Computer-Mediated Communication, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol. 14, No. 1, Article 5, Publication date: May 2007 27. Thompson Leigh and Nadler Janice, (2002), Negotiation via information technology- Theory and Applications, Journal of social issues, vol. 58 28. YUAN YUFEI, HEAD MILENA DU MEI, (2003), The Effects of Multimedia Communication on Web-Based Negotiation, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands Read More