Copyright Statement

All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of Nova Southeastern University. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.

Date of Award

1-21-2015

Document Type

Dissertation - NSU Access Only

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy in Conflict Analysis & Resolution

Department

Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences

First Advisor

Ronald J. Chenail

Second Advisor

Neil H. Katz

Third Advisor

Keiji Kawai

Fourth Advisor

Braham Dabscheck

Abstract

Walton and McKersie (1965) defined relationship patterns as those shared attitudes that are important to negotiators when they are interacting together. In the case of the 2004 Japanese Professional Baseball collective bargaining negotiations, Dabscheck (2006) discussed the major issues and events that led to the two (2) day labor strike. However, his article did not describe how the relationship pattern between the Nippon Professional Baseball (NPB) and the Japanese

Professional Baseball Players Association (JPBPA) changed to facilitate the settlement of the conflict. Along the same vein, researchers (Adair, Brett, & Okumura, 2001; Adair & Brett, 2005; Deck, Farmer, & Zeng, 2009; and Doucet, Jehn, Weldon, & Wang, 2009; Drake, 1995; Neu, 1988; and McDaniel, 2000) attempted to show a link between negotiator behavior from cultural and communication perspectives, however, there was little empirical attention paid to the psychological process, such as thoughts, perceptions, emotions, and attitudes, and its link to negotiator behavior leaving a gap in the existing scholarly literature. To address the gap in Dabscheck's (2006) article and the existing scholarly literature, I utilized Yin's (2009) Case Study Research Approach to qualitative inquiry by analyzing document reviews and engaging collaboratively with research participants through focused interviews to investigate how the relationship pattern in the 2004 Japanese Professional Baseball collective bargaining negotiations changed from the beginning to the end of the conflict if at all.

I found that the NPB and the JPBPA institutional pattern of relationship at the start of the conflict began with a containment-aggression relationship pattern, and over four (4) months, the pattern of relationship did change from containment-aggression to cooperation. Upon further investigation, I found that the NPB and the JPBPA negotiators operated initially in the distributive bargaining sub-process utilizing reinforcement tactics, but over the course of four (4) months, they began to operate in the integrative bargaining sub-process with the utilization of cognitive balance tactics even though the NPB and the JPBPA negotiators never abandoned operating in the distributive bargaining sub-process. In essence, they operated in hybrid distributive and integrative sub-processes at the same time. Moreover, I discovered that the NPB and the JPBPA moved from containment-aggression to cooperation not only because of a change in the NPB's lead negotiator position, but also because of a shared emotional moment between the NPB and the JPBPA negotiators, which initiated a shift away from stalemate. Although environmental factors, such as the media, fans, politicians, and other unions, over the course of four (4) months did not waiver in their support for the resolution of the conflict, the evidence did not directly demonstrate the way that their support and their influence manifested in the collective bargaining negotiations.

Available for download on Friday, March 01, 2019

Files over 10MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "Save as..."

To access this thesis/dissertation you must have a valid nova.edu OR mynsu.nova.edu email address and create an account for NSUWorks.

  Contact Author

Share

COinS