Intersection of negotiation and sustainability in business: review and future research
Ghazal Layeghi et al.
What the paper says
Purpose This study aims to contribute to the intersection of negotiation and sustainability. These two domains have often overlooked each other's importance despite their shared concerns with cooperation, coordination and value creation. Our study moves beyond descriptive mapping by integrating fragmented research streams and, through a set of original propositions, offers a forward-looking agenda for research and practice. Design/methodology/approach This paper relies on a structured review of the literature, using the bibliometric-systematic literature review (B-SLR) framework. Findings Our analysis identifies four main clusters. This work indicates a one-sided engagement: most contributions come from sustainability studies, with limited input from negotiation scholars. Highlighting the absence of an integrative theoretical lens, we suggest that stakeholder theory could bridge the domains. The findings confirm that negotiation is a constitutive process through which sustainability goals are pursued, not merely an instrumental tool. Social implications For sustainability to move from intention to reality, it must be negotiated. Effective negotiation is vital for firms dealing with internal demands, navigating diverse stakeholder expectations and implementing key initiatives like environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices. This study provides the crucial theoretical framework needed to analyse these processes, ensuring that ambitious sustainability goals are translated into credible, actionable and effective real-world results. Originality/value Through our six propositions, the study advances a new understanding of how negotiation and sustainability intersect and mutually shape one another. These propositions reframe negotiation as a constitutive process rather than a transactional tool, linking micro-level interactions with macro-level sustainability outcomes and offering new conceptual directions for future research.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.