(Download PDF) Negotiation Readings Exercises and Cases 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank Full Chapter

Negotiation Readings Exercises and
Cases 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank

Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankfan.com/product/negotiation-readings-exercises-and-cases-6th-edition
-lewicki-test-bank/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Negotiation Readings Exercises and Cases 7th Edition

Lewicki Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/negotiation-readings-exercises-
and-cases-7th-edition-lewicki-solutions-manual/
Understanding and Managing Diversity Readings Cases and

Exercises 6th Edition Harvey Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/understanding-and-managing-
diversity-readings-cases-and-exercises-6th-edition-harvey-test-
bank/
Essentials of Negotiation 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/essentials-of-negotiation-6th-
edition-lewicki-test-bank/
Understanding and Managing Diversity Readings Cases and

Exercises 6th Edition Harvey Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/understanding-and-managing-
diversity-readings-cases-and-exercises-6th-edition-harvey-
solutions-manual/
Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/negotiation-7th-edition-lewicki-
test-bank/
Essentials of Negotiation 6th Edition Lewicki Solutions

Manual
edition-lewicki-solutions-manual/
Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/negotiation-7th-edition-lewicki-
solutions-manual/
Essentials of Negotiation 5th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
edition-lewicki-test-bank/
Essentials of Negotiation Canadian 3rd Edition Lewicki

Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/essentials-of-negotiation-
canadian-3rd-edition-lewicki-test-bank/
Chapter 10
Relationships in Negotiation
Fill in the Blank Questions
1. Negotiations occur in a rich and complex social context that has a significant impact on how the
____________ interact and how the process evolves.
Answer: parties Page: 296
2. Only recently have researchers begun to examine actual negotiations in a rich ____________
context in order to offer better prescriptions on how to negotiate where the parties are deeply
embedded in a relationship.
Answer: relationship Page: 297
3. Distributive issues within ____________ negotiations can be emotionally hot.

Answer: relationship Page: 299
4. In some negotiations, relationship preservation is the overarching negotiation goal and parties
may make concessions on ____________ issues to preserve or enhance the relationship.
Answer: substantive Page: 300
5. Salacuse says that negotiators should recognize a long-term business deal as a ____________
negotiation.
Answer: continuing Page: 301
6. In communal sharing, collective identity takes precedence over ____________ ____________.

Answer: individual identity Page: 302
7. It is clear that much of the early work of negotiation research has been dominated by the
assumptions of a ____________ ____________ relationship.
Answer: market pricing Page: 303
8. According to John Gottman’ studies; successful long-term relationships are characterized by

continuing to stress what one likes, values, appreciates and ____________ in the other
Answer: respects Page: 306
9. ____________ is the legacy that negotiators leave behind after a negotiation encounter with
another party.
Answer: Reputation Page: 307
106 Test Bank, Chapter 10

10. McAllister defines ____________ as "an individual's belief in and willingness to act on the
words, actions and decisions of another."
Answer: trust Page: 309
11. An individual's ____________ ____________ toward trust can be described as individual

differences in personality that make some people more trusting than others.
Answer: chronic disposition Page: 309
12. ____________ trust exists because the parties understand and appreciate each other’s wants and
come to understand what they must do to sustain the other’s trust.
Answer: Identification-based Page: 309
13. Parties affirm strong identification-based trust by developing a ____________ ____________;

co-locating; creating joint products or goals, such as a new product line or a new set of objectives;
and committing to commonly shared values.
Answer: collective identity Page: 310
14. Identification-based trust is defined as confident positive expectations regarding another’s

____________ and is grounded in perceived compatibility of values, common goals, and positive
emotional attachment to the other.
Answer: conduct Page: 311
15. Integrative processes tend to increase trust, while more ____________ processes are likely to
decrease trust.
Answer: distributive Page: 311, 312
16. Trustors, and those trusted, may focus on different things as ____________ is being built.
Answer: trust Page: 313
17. Distributive justice is about the distribution of ____________.

Answer: outcomes Page: 316
18. ____________ justice is about how organizations appear to treat groups of individuals and the
norms that develop for how they should be treated.
Answer: Systemic Page: 316
19. Negotiators who helped develop a group negotiation strategy were more ____________ to it and
to the group’s negotiation goals.
Answer: committed Page: 317
Lewicki/Barry/Saunders, Negotiation, 6/e 107

20. Trying to overcome a bad reputation, rebuilding trust, or restoring ____________ to a
relationship are much easier to talk about than to actually do!
Answer: fairness Page: 320
True/False Questions
T F 21. Negotiations occur in a rich and complex social context that has a significant impact on
how the parties interact and how the process evolves.
Answer: True Page: 296
T F 22. For decades researchers have examined negotiations in a relationship context, in order to
offer better prescriptions on how to negotiate where the parties have a substantial history
and anticipate a long future relationship
Answer: False Page: 297
T F 23. In a relationship, gathering information about the other's ideas, preferences and priorities
is often the most important activity.
T F 24. One of the disadvantages of negotiating in a game or simulation is that there is a defined
end.
T F 25. In relationship negotiations, parties should never make concessions on substantive issues
to preserve or enhance the relationship.
T F 26. Authority ranking is a one-to one correspondence relationship in which people are
distinct but equal.
T F 27. In a market pricing relationship, people see each other as interchangeable.

T F 28. Parties who are in a communal-sharing relationship (or who expect to have future
interaction) focus their attention more on the other party's outcomes as well as their own.
T F 29. First impressions and early experiences with others are powerful in shaping others’
expectations; once these expectations are shaped, they become easy to change over time.

T F 30. In calculus-based trust, the promise of reward is likely to be a more significant motivator
than the threat of punishment.
T F 31. Identification-based trust relies on information about the other rather than the
management of rewards and punishments.
T F 32. Trust development is a mutual process, and while parties can initiate actions which may
move the trust-development process forward, the strongest trust must be mutually
developed at a pace acceptable to both parties.
T F 33. It is the early research on trust that has revealed somewhat more complex relationships
between trust and negotiation behavior.
T F 34. Reciprocity occurs among individuals who are better at taking the perspective of the
other in a negotiation, and can also be ‘coached’ by encouraging a negotiator to consider
the views of the other party in their decision making.
T F 35. Systemic justice is about the way that organizations appear to treat groups of individuals.
T F 36. When some groups are discriminated against, disfranchised, or systematically given poorer
salaries or working conditions, the parties may be more concerned about specific procedural
elements and less concerned that the overall system may be biased or discriminatory in its
treatment of certain groups and their concerns.
T F 37. The four forms of justice (distributive, procedural, interactive, systemic) are separate
entities that are never intertwined.
T F 38. Perceptions of distributive unfairness are likely to contribute to parties' satisfaction with
the result of a decision, while perceptions of procedural unfairness are likely to contribute
to the parties' dissatisfaction with the result or with the institution that implemented the
unfair procedure.

T F 39. Idiosyncratic deals are much more common today, and they are not reserved only for a
special few.
T F 40. Building a relationship may be an essential critical component of being successful in

negotiation.
Multiple Choice Questions
41. Laboratory controlled research is much easier to conduct than field research because studying live
negotiators in the middle of an often complex negotiation causes them to object to all but one of
the following?
A) to conduct interviews.
B) to ask questions.
C) to publicly report actual successes.
D) to publicly report actual failures.
E) they object to all the above.
Answer: Page: 297
42. In a transactional negotiation, the most important issue is usually the

A) enhancing the relationship.
B) better deal.
C) dependence dynamics.
D) inventory questions.
E) all of the above.
Answer: B Page: 298
43. Which of the following parameters shapes our understanding of relationship negotiation strategy
and tactics?
A) Negotiating within relationships takes place at a single point in time.
B) Negotiation in relationships is only about the issue.
C) Negotiating within relationships may never end.
D) Parties never make concessions on substantive issues.
E) All of the above parameters shape our understanding of relationship negotiation strategy and
tactics.
Answer: C Page: 299
44. Because relationship negotiations are never over,

A) parties generally tackle negotiations over tough issues first in order to "get off on the right
foot."
B) it is often impossible to anticipate the future and negotiate everything "up front."
C) issues on which parties truly disagree will go away with the conclusion of the negotiation.
D) parties should never make concessions on substantive issues.
E) All of the above are consequences of relationship negotiations.

Answer: B Page: 300
45. Jeswald Salacuse suggests which rule for negotiating a relationship?

A) minimize the prenegotiation stage of the relationship
B) recognize a long-term business deal as a continuing negotiation
C) eliminate the need for mediation or conciliation
D) end all discussions when the contract is signed
E) Salacuse suggests all of the above rules for negotiating a relationship.
Answer: B Page: 301
46. Communal sharing is a relationship of

A) unity, community, collective identity, and kindness.
B) asymmetric differences.
C) one-to-one correspondence.
D) balanced reciprocity.
E) None of the above describes a relationship of communal sharing.
Answer: A Page: 302
47. An example of authority ranking as a form of relationship would include

A) college roommates
B) fraternal organizations
C) auto salesperson and buyer
D) soldiers and their commander
E) church congregates
Answer: D Page: 302
48. Higher ranks dominate lower ranks is an example of “authority ranking” as a fundamental
relationship form. Under what other form would you find the concept of “tit-for-tat” revenge?
A) communal sharing
B) authority ranking
C) equality matching
D) market pricing
E) none of the above
Answer: C Page: 302
49. The values that govern a market pricing relationship are determined by a market system and
include all but which of the following?
A) utility points
B) the relationship with the negotiator
C) ratio of price to goods
D) fair pricing
E) the dollars
Answer: B Page: 303

50. Which of the statements is supported by research in communal-sharing relationships?
A) Parties in a communal-sharing relationship are more cooperative and empathetic.
B) Parties in a communal-sharing relationship craft better quality agreements.
C) Parties in a communal-sharing relationship focus more attention on the norms that develop
about their working together.
D) Parties in a communal-sharing relationship are more likely to share information with the
other and less likely to use coercive tactics.
E) All of the above statements are supported by research in communal sharing relationships.
Answer: E Page: 304, 305
51. What key elements become more critical and pronounced when they occur within a negotiation?
A) the agency relationship, the number of negotiation parties, and the role of emotion
B) the agency relationship and the role of trust and fairness
C) the roles of reputation, trust and justice
D) the structure of the constituency and the agency relationship
E) none of the above is key elements in managing negotiations within relationships
Answer: C Page: 307
52. Reputation is:

A) a perceptual identity.
B) reflective of the combination of personal characteristics.
C) demonstrated behavior.
D) intended images preserved over time.
E) all of the above statements define reputation.
Answer: E Page: 307, 308
53. In calculus-based trust

A) the trustor calculates the value of creating and sustaining trust in the relationship relative to
the costs of severing it.
B) the relationship develops over time, largely because the parties develop a history of
experience with each other which allows them to predict the other's behavior.
C) regular communication and courtship are key processes.
D) the parties effectively understand and appreciate the other's wants.
E) All of the above statements are inherent in calculus based trust.
Answer: A Page: 309
54. All but one of the following actions contributes to increase identification-based trust. Which one
does not contribute?
A) Stand for the same principles.
B) Monitor the other party’s actions.
C) Develop similar interests.
D) Try to develop similar goals, objectives and scenarios.
E) Try to be interested in the same things.
Answer: B Page: 309, 310

55. Which type of justice is about the process of determining outcomes?
A) Distributive
B) Interactive
C) Procedural
D) Systemic
E) None of the above.
Answer: C Page: 316
56. How parties treat each other in one-to-one relationships is the process of which of the following
justices?
A) Procedural
B) Interactional
C) Systemic
D) Distributive
E) None of the above
Answer: B Page: 316
57. Which of the following conclusions about the issue of fairness is not a true statement?
A) Involvement in the process of helping to shape a negotiation strategy increases commitment
to that strategy and willingness to pursue it.
B) Negotiators (buyers in a market transaction) who are encouraged (“primed”) to think about
fairness are more cooperative in distributive negotiations.
C) Parties who are made offers they perceive as unfair may reject them out of hand, even though
the amount offered may be better than the alternative settlement, which is to receive nothing
at all.
D) Establishment of some “objective standard” of fairness has a positive impact on the
negotiations and satisfaction with the outcome.
E) All of the above are true statements.
Answer: E Page: 317
58. Denise Rousseau has researched and defined the “idiosyncratic deal” as the unique ways that
employers may come to treat certain employees compared to others in the same office or
environment. Which observation stated below is inaccurate?
A) Deals are more common when workers are willing to negotiate.
B) Deals are more likely to work effectively when performance criteria are clear and well
specified.
C) Deals are more common in certain countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom
and New Zealand.
D) Deals are more common when workers are located in large organizations.
E) Deals are more likely to work when workers trust the performance appraisal process.
Answer: D Page: 319
59. Which question that should be asked about working on the improvement of a relationship is
false?
A) If the relationship is in difficulty, what might have caused it, and how can I gather
information or perspective to improve the situation?
B) How can we take the pressure off each other so that we can give each other the freedom of

choice to talk about what has happened, and what is necessary to fix it?
C) Trust repair is a long and slow process. It requires adequate explanations for past behavior,
apologies, and perhaps even reparations. Interestingly, cultures differ in the way they manage
this process
D) Must we surface the deeply felt emotions that have produced anger, frustration, rejection and
disappointment? Should we effectively vent these emotions, or understand their causes, so
that we can move beyond them?
E) How can we begin to appreciate each other’s contributions, and the positive things that we
have done together in the past? How can we restore that respect and value each other’s
contributions?
Answer: D Page: 320, 321
60. Within relationships, we see that parties shift their focus considerably, away from a sole focus on
price and exchange, to also attend to
A) the future of the relationship.
B) the level of trust between the parties.
C) the emotions and evaluations of the other negotiator.
D) questions of fairness.
E) Within relationships, parties shift their focus to attend to all of the above.
Answer: E Page: 321
Short Answer Essays
61. How does context affect negotiation?

Answer: One major way that context affects negotiation is that people are in relationships that
have a past, present and future. Page: 296
62. Why are some research questions best answered under controlled laboratory conditions?
Answer: Because it would be impossible to simulate the same conditions repeatedly in actual
negotiations. Page: 297
63. In relationship negotiation, the resolution of simple distributive issues can have what effects on
future decisions?
Answer: The settlement of any one negotiation issue can create undesired or unintended
precedents for the future. These negotiations may not only set precedents, or blueprints for how
similar future issues should be resolved, but they may also shift the nature of the future
relationship, particularly around power and dependence. Page: 298
64. What does Salacuse say is the importance of prenegotiation?

Answer: The prenegotiation process enhances gaining information about the other party and
builds a relationship that may enhance trust, information sharing and productive discussions.
Page: 301
65. Define a relationship.

Answer: A pairing of entities that has meaning to the parties, in which the understood form of
present and future interactions influences their behavior today. Page: 302
66. Describe an equality matching relationship.

Answer: Equality matching is a one-to-one correspondence relationship in which people are
distinct but equal, as manifested in balanced reciprocity, equal share distributions or identical
contributions, in-kind replacement compensation, and turn-taking. People see each other as equal
and separate, but often interchangeable; each is expected to both contribute equally to others and
receive equally from others. Page: 302
67. How do people view goods in a market-pricing relationship?

Answer: In market-pricing relationships, parties can attempt to change the ratio of price to goods
in their own favor (maximize their utility) or they can seek what may be defined as a fair price.
Page: 303
68. What are some of the findings of the limited amount of negotiation research about communal-
sharing relationships?
Answer: Studies have shown, however, that compared to those in other kinds of negotiations,
parties who are in a communal-sharing relationship: Are more cooperative and empathetic, craft
better quality agreements, perform better on both decision making and motor tasks, focus their
attention on the other party’s outcomes as well as their own, are more likely to share information
with the other and less likely to use coercive tactics, and are more likely to use indirect
communication about conflict issues and develop a unique conflict structure (among other
findings). Page: 303
69. What two questions should be asked when arriving at an impasse?

Answer: Ask what logic or data might change their views; and, ask if there is any way
you might jointly design a technique that might provide more information. Page: 305
70. Give some examples of traits that help influence the definition of a reputation.
Answer: Traits may include qualities such as age, race and gender; education and past experience,
and personality traits, skills and behaviors. Page: 308
71. Why are negative reputations difficult to repair?

Answer: The more long-standing the negative reputation, the harder it is to change that reputation
to a more positive one. Reputations need to be actively defended and renewed in others eyes.
Particularly when any event is likely to be seen by others in a negative light, we must work hard
to defend and protect our reputation, and actively work to make sure that others do not remember
the experience in a negative way. Page: 309
72. What are the three things that contribute to the level of trust one negotiator may have for another?
Answer: The individual's chronic disposition toward trust; situation factors; and the history of the
relationship between the parties. Page: 309

73. What are Lewicki and Wiethoff’s two types of trust?
Answer: Calculus-based trust and identification-based trust. Page: 309
74. Define identification-based trust.

Answer: Identification-based trust is based on identification with the other's desires and
intentions. At this level, trust exists because the parties effectively understand and appreciate the
other's wants; this mutual understanding is developed to the point that each can effectively act for
the other. Page: 309
75. Why is distrust growing in today’s economy?

Answer: Distrust is increasing in today’s work environment, as a weak economy, corporate
scandals, and the increasing discrepancy between chief executive and worker-level salaries
continues to increase. Page: 310
76. Under the four actions to manage the different forms of trust in negotiations, describe the basic
steps to increase calculus-based trust.
Answer: 1) Create and meet the other party’s expectations. 2) Stress the benefits of creating
mutual trust. 3) Establish credibility. 4) Keep promises. 5) Develop a good reputation. Page:
312
77. Do many people approach a new relationship with an unknown party with remarkably high levels
of trust?
Answer: Yes, most of us assume that the other can be trusted and are remarkably willing to trust
the other even with very little information or knowledge about the other. Page: 313
78. What role does trust play in an online negotiation?

Answer: Face-to-face negotiation encourages greater trust development than negotiation on-line.
There is evidence that parties anticipating an online negotiation expect less trust before the
negotiations began, are less satisfied with their negotiation outcomes, are less confident in the
quality of their performance during the negotiation, trust the other less after the negotiation, and
have less desire for a future interaction with the other party. Page: 314
79. Define interactional justice.

Answer: Interactional justice is about how parties treat each other in one-to-one relationships.
Page: 316
80. How does an egocentric bias play out in judgments about fairness?
Answer: Recent research has shown that this egocentric bias can be diminished by strong
interactional justice. That is, recognizing the need to treat the other person fairly, and actually
treating the other fairly, lead to a smaller egocentric bias, a more even split of the resources,
quicker settlements, and fewer stalemates. Page: 317

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Michelin will
tell you free of charge?
Drop a line, ring us up, or call at one of our

Touring Offices and you will receive a carefully
worked out description of the route to follow.
Transcriber’s Notes.
1. Silently corrected simple spelling, grammar, and typographical errors.
2. Retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed.
3. Some of the illustrations have been moved to be closer to their descriptions.
4. In this eBook some illustrations have been moved to other pages. The text
has been changed where necessary.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SOISSONS
BEFORE AND DURING THE WAR ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you

derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works
calculated using the method you already use to
calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to
the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but
he has agreed to donate royalties under this
paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within
60 days following each date on which you prepare
(or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a

user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within
30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the
terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other
copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a

full refund of any money paid for a work or a
replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is
discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for

free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set
forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.

(Download PDF) Negotiation Readings Exercises and Cases 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Download PDF) Negotiation Readings Exercises and Cases 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Negotiation Readings Exercises and

Cases 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank

Negotiation Readings Exercises and Cases 7th Edition

Understanding and Managing Diversity Readings Cases and

Essentials of Negotiation 6th Edition Lewicki Test Bank

Understanding and Managing Diversity Readings Cases and

Essentials of Negotiation 6th Edition Lewicki Solutions

Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Solutions Manual

Essentials of Negotiation 5th Edition Lewicki Test Bank

Essentials of Negotiation Canadian 3rd Edition Lewicki

Fill in the Blank Questions

3. Distributive issues within ____________ negotiations can be emotionally hot.

6. In communal sharing, collective identity takes precedence over ____________ ____________.

8. According to John Gottman’ studies; successful long-term relationships are characterized by

106 Test Bank, Chapter 10

11. An individual's ____________ ____________ toward trust can be described as individual

13. Parties affirm strong identification-based trust by developing a ____________ ____________;

14. Identification-based trust is defined as confident positive expectations regarding another’s

17. Distributive justice is about the distribution of ____________.

Lewicki/Barry/Saunders, Negotiation, 6/e 107

T F 27. In a market pricing relationship, people see each other as interchangeable.

108 Test Bank, Chapter 10

Lewicki/Barry/Saunders, Negotiation, 6/e 109

T F 40. Building a relationship may be an essential critical component of being successful in

Multiple Choice Questions

42. In a transactional negotiation, the most important issue is usually the

44. Because relationship negotiations are never over,

110 Test Bank, Chapter 10

45. Jeswald Salacuse suggests which rule for negotiating a relationship?

46. Communal sharing is a relationship of

47. An example of authority ranking as a form of relationship would include

Lewicki/Barry/Saunders, Negotiation, 6/e 111

52. Reputation is:

53. In calculus-based trust

112 Test Bank, Chapter 10

Lewicki/Barry/Saunders, Negotiation, 6/e 113

Short Answer Essays

61. How does context affect negotiation?

64. What does Salacuse say is the importance of prenegotiation?

65. Define a relationship.

114 Test Bank, Chapter 10

66. Describe an equality matching relationship.

67. How do people view goods in a market-pricing relationship?

69. What two questions should be asked when arriving at an impasse?

71. Why are negative reputations difficult to repair?

Lewicki/Barry/Saunders, Negotiation, 6/e 115

74. Define identification-based trust.

75. Why is distrust growing in today’s economy?

78. What role does trust play in an online negotiation?

79. Define interactional justice.

116 Test Bank, Chapter 10

Drop a line, ring us up, or call at one of our

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

START: FULL LICENSE

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

6. In communal sharing, collective identity takes precedence over .

11. An individual's toward trust can be described as individual

13. Parties affirm strong identification-based trust by developing a ;