In this chapter I describe a series of studies of intergroup bargaining and negotiation performed since the early 1970s by myself and colleagues at the Universities of Nottingham and Kent at Canterbury. Some are experimental, others are field studies, but all bear on the central theme of the balance and conflict between the representatives' interpersonal and intergroup relationships, and the strategies by which the conflict is managed and the balance maintained.

The work will be described in three sections. In the first section the results of a number of experimental studies will be described. These show that when the salience of the interpersonal relationships is decreased, the outcomes of bargaining reflect more the relative strength of case of the respective party positions. In the second section, a number of field studies of wage negotiations are described which indicate that (i) in practice, negotiations pass through stages in which the balance between interpersonal and intergroup orientations varies; and (ii) successfully concluded negotiations are characterized by periods of both intense intergroup competition and interpersonal cooperation. In the third section some recent studies of arbitration are described. These indicate that skilful arbitrators structure the hearing so as to satisfy the stage-by-stage requirements of successful negotiation.

The balance between intergroup and interpersonal exchange: experimental work

Variations in bargaining style. The relationships between industrial wage bargainers representing management and unions have been said to vary from ‘conflict’ and ‘containment-aggression’ at one extreme to ‘cooperation’ and ‘collusion’, and especially ‘collusion’, at the other (Walton & McKersie 1965).