A Lifecycle Macro Phase Model for Negotiation William W. Baber ( ✉ ) Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan baber@gsm.kyoto-u.ac.jp Abstract. Existing models of negotiation as a process are incomplete and do not show an overall, end to end process. The phases of existing models have not been clearly defined by identifying their boundaries. After reviewing contributions of existing models, the paper identifies phases, clarifies their boundaries, and proposes a bird’s eye level model supported by examples in academic literature and public sources. Although an ideal model, it is a guideline and not a strict prescription for success. The proposed model contributes to theory around nego‐ tiation by providing a clarifying look at the overall sequence of macro phases in negotiation. With the model, academics and practitioners have a unified starting point for monitoring, communicating, and further developing negotiation models. Keywords: Negotiation · Phase model · Conflict resolution · Process model 1 Introduction Negotiation is not only a vital business interaction, it has become a field of academic study crossing studies such as Management [1–3], Psychology [4, 5], International Business [6], Law [7], and International Relations [8], among others. Negotiation has been theorized variously, as dimensions [9], DNA [10], teams [11], and jazz [12]. Process is also a way to view negotiation. The importance of process to negotiation has been identified by academia [13–17]. Before mapping negotiation processes at detailed, disaggregated levels, however, the total lifecycle of negotiation must be considered and modeled in terms of its macro phases. Various process models are reviewed in this paper to ask (1) whether evidence for macro phases from inception to completion of a nego‐ tiation can be found, and (2) whether the boundaries of those phases can be determined. Current negotiation models lack completeness as they may exclude activities before or after the main negotiation interactions. Further, they may lack features such as feed‐ back loops which return negotiators to previous phases with new information and deci‐ sion gates to quit or continue. Such features would make models more accurate and usable to theoreticians, educators, and practitioners of negotiation who will benefit by gaining new theory building tools, teaching insights, and best practices. This article draws on documented negotiations to contribute to the conversation about negotiation phases the following: evidence of phases, their characteristics, boundaries of phases, transition across the model including feedback loops, and a full macro phase process model of the negotiation lifecycle. © Springer International Publishing AG 2017 M. Schoop and D.M. Kilgour (Eds.): GDN 2017, LNBIP 293, pp. 107–119, 2017. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-63546-0_8