Open Access

For over half a century, psychological research has been studying negotiations in detail. For a similarly long time, various researchers have been hypothesizing on and agreeing that, in negotiations, resources play a fundamental role in parties´ behaviors and outcomes. Paradoxically, empirical findings that provide insights into the effects of resources are scarce. The current research seeks to shed light on the overwhelming consensus that resources may shape negotiations. Specifically, in a series of four original research articles, we systematically examine the overarching question of how tangible and even intangible resources affect parties´ attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes. Resources in negotiations can be characterized as all the tangible and intangible aspects of the negotiation that are related to the negotiators´ interests. Thus, the central activity of the bargaining relationship is the allocation of tangible resources, while intangibles are simultaneously involved. Consistent with this basic idea, we assume that whether parties focus on catching hold of obtaining their adversaries´ tangible resources or on losing grip of their own tangibles impacts their concession behavior and outcomes. Parties with a focus on losing their own tangible resources should experience more loss aversion, concede less, and should achieve better outcomes than parties who focus on catching hold of obtaining their counterpart´s tangibles. It follows that what should be essential in the ongoing negotiation process should apply to the first move at the bargaining table as well. When first-movers lead responders to focus on catching hold of tangible resources, the well-documented anchoring effect should occur, benefitting the first-mover. Contrarily, when the first-mover induces a focus on the resource the responder is about to lose, responders should be motivated to adjust their counterproposal far away from the opening anchor. Responders´ motivation to adjust should leverage the anchoring effect in negotiations. Further, we outline the very special role of money in negotiations, that is perceived as likely the most important tangible resource. Ultimately, we address the important role of intangible resources, in addition to that of tangible resources, and suggest that the intangible resource of professional experience is related to the negotiator´s attitudes towards unethical bargaining tactics. Overall, the findings of these research projects suggest that not only tangible but also intangible resources do in fact have the fundamental impact on negotiators´ behavior and outcomes that has been hypothesized for a long time. Parties who focus on losing grip of their own tangible resources concede less and are better off at the end of the negotiations than parties who focus on catching hold of their counterparts´ resources. We report evidence for this basic finding, from the first move at the bargaining table to the final agreement. Our findings help to better understand the key role of money in negotiations and to highlight the ´mythical´ components of this legendary resource. In addition to our findings on tangible resources, our study reveals a strong negative relationship between negotiators´ intangible resource of professional experience and their tendency to endorse unethical bargaining tactics. We conclude that losing tangible resources and keeping sight of intangible resources may have profound effects on parties´ negotiation attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes. We discuss theoretical contributions and practical implications, and suggest areas of future research.