Dimensions of International Negotiation: A Test of Iklé's Typology

Daniel Druckman*, Jennifer Martin, Susan Allen Nan, Dimostenis Yagcioglu

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

20 Citations (Scopus)


Results from statistical analyses of 30 cases of international negotiations supported Ikle's typology of negotiating objectives. The cases, sampled from the collection of Pew Case Studies in International Affairs, were distinguished in terms of five objectives: innovation, redistribution, extension, normalization, and side effects. In addition, a sixth objective was identified: negotiations concerning the creation of multilateral regimes. These cases focused on issues that surfaced on the international agenda during the 1980s. Each type had a relatively distinct profile based on such aspects of negotiation as the number of parties and issues, bargaining strategies, media exposure, stability of the process, and types of outcomes. The methodology contributes to the state-of-the art in comparative analysis and the results have implications for the development of middle-range theories of negotiation. They also contribute to practice, by enabling negotiators to evaluate future cases in terms of knowledge about past cases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)89-108
Number of pages20
JournalGroup Decision and Negotiation
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1999
Externally publishedYes


  • Comparative analysis
  • International negotiations
  • Multidimensional scaling
  • Negotiating objectives
  • Pew case studies
  • Profiles of negotiation


Dive into the research topics of 'Dimensions of International Negotiation: A Test of Iklé's Typology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this