Pagtawad: Haggling Behavior PDF

Philippine Journal ofPrychology 1979. Volume 12, No.2. pp. 2.5-35 PAGTAWAD: HAGGLING BEHAVIOR MILAGRO E. DU and ROLANDA PAYSU Department of Psychology...

Philippine Journal ofPrychology 1979. Volume 12, No.2. pp. 2.5-35 PAGTAWAD: HAGGLING BEHAVIOR MILAGRO E. DU and ROLANDA PAYSU Department of Psychology A teneo de Manila University The commonly employed strategies of "pagtawad" by Filipino consumers were revealed with the use of two indigenous non-reactive research methods called "pagtatanong-tanong" and "pagmamasid", "Pagtawad" or haggling is the heart of an economic bargaining relationship between a buyer and a seller - the arranging of an exchange of goods in a given market. The elaborate art of "pagtawad" was analyzed within the context of bargaining by the identification and explanation of the prominent features of this basic social interaction. In conclusion, an exposition of the importance of studying the social psychology of bargaining, oarticularly in the Filipino setting, was briefly presented. "'Magkano 00 ang gusto ko?" The above mentioned passage is a Pilipino "00. Turingan mo. Hindi tayo magtata- translation of a passage taken from P. G. waran. " Wodehouse' Aunts Aren't Gentlemen (1974). Napakagat labi siya: It illustrates a typical haggling scene, Haggling "Eh, sa palagay ko hindi ko maaaring is a behavior, perhaps as universal as helping gawing mura kahit gustuhin ko man itself. It is a product of man's economic Ibibigay ko 00 sa inyo sa halagang bente nature: the desire for efficiency at the least pesos. " cost. Although it is universal, the specific Nakahinga ako nang maluwag. Mas mataas circumstances surrounding it may vary from na presyo pa nga ang aking inaasahan. Maging culture to culture. For this reason, this paper siya man ay waring nabigla - napamura yata attempts to present an analysis of haggling in ang bigay niya kaya bigla niyang inihabol: its local color among the Filipino consumers. "Eh, trenta ho pala. " It will look into the reasons for engaging in "Trenta!" this behavior and explore some of the com- "Trenta 00. " mon haggling strategies employed by FillpitlO "Magtawaran muna tayo," sabi ko. consumers. Ngunit nang imungkahi ko ang bente y singko pesos, na sa aking palagay ay mas Before delving into this topic, an inspection mogandang numero kaysa trenta, matamlay of the language used in relation to this beha- siyang umiling, at dahil sa mas magaling siyang vior may prove helpful to further understand- tumawad sa akin, nagkatapos kami sa trenta y ing. The Tagalog term for haggling is tawtXl. singko. lyon ay hindi isa sa mga mobubuting Panganiban (1972) in his Diksyururryo Tes» uro, defines it in two ways: tawad ~v paghingi araw ng aking pagtawad.. 25  26 MILAGRO E. DU and ROLANDAPAYSU ng rJiskwento 0 paghiling ng bawas sa halaga \ frowned upon by other people." \\hen asked (request for discount) and tawad ay diskwento for the reason, she said emphatically, "Aba! o bawas (discount given or allowed); The first Sa hirap ba naman ng buhay ngayon, karami- meaning signifies the act (the behavior of han ay nagtitipid upang ingatan ang pea, haggling itself); the' second, the outcome. or. tapos hindi ka tatawad, para kang nagtatapon result of the act. Using prefixes and suffixes, different words can be derived from, tawad. ng pera:" i Magpatawad is to allow a discount (Ale, mug- Surprisingly. a number of the respondents ~ patawad ka naman sa tinda mo). Mapagtawad or palatawad is a. haggler. Its synonyms is gave some reasons other than economic for engaging in haggling. One middle-aged man, an I barat. (Si Aling Iska ay masyadong palatawad, ~ngineer , married with three children reo kinayayamutan tuloy siya ng mga tindera at. marked, "Tumatawad ako para hindi ako mai- napagwiwiklmng barat.) Tawaran is to ask for sahan ng tinderajo." (I haggle so that the a discount on (x). (Tawaran mo yung bakya, seller will not put one over me). Clearly, this baka pumayag ang tindera.) Comparable terms man views haggling situation as an avenue of for tawtxl are found in the following dialects': deception and, one has to be on the alert Hiligaynon.; ayo; Ilokano - tawar; Panga- against this deception. This man is a suspi- sinan - tawal and Cebuano - hangyo. ,cious haggler. Another interesting response came from a young lady elementary teacher. "Kapag tumatawad ako at nakuha leo sa pres- Reasons For Haggling yong gusto ko, nastsiyahan ako' kasi ako ang I \\hen the researchers went around asking various individuals, "Kapag ikaw ay namimili; tumatawad ka ba?" they received vaned res- ponses ranging from "Hindi -.nakakainjs, eh, nasunod;" (Having made a successful haggle gives me a sense of satisfaction, because some- thing haS been done according to my way). Apparently, hagglirig is taken-as it venue for.' Depende, Paminsan-minsan, Siyempre 0 satisfying the need for achievement: Other Dapat," A handful' of respondents said that ,answers seemed more naive such as :"'''Sabi leasi they find haggling not only time-consumjng 'nila, kailangang tumawad lalo na pag namimili but irritating. Mter haggllng, they experience, sa sidewalks 0 sa Central Market. " -Obviously. a'feeling of uneasiness and doubt - "Tama ba nila refers to.the significant others that in- ang 'tawad leo; baka lalO akong napamahal?' fluence a person's decision to engage in a (Did 1 haggle for the right amount? I might behavior or " not. People usually seek the have bought the goods atst,ill a higher price!) advice of more experienced persons 'to avoid Thus. these people prefer togo to stores making errors. "KJtilangang tumawad, -ktuiM- where prices are fixed and where they could ,kakahiya raman sa'mga kakilala leo pag napa- leave feeling satisfied that they have obtained maJuzl aka nang bili;" Here, the desire is not their money's worth. ' to look too naive or stupid in' the eyes of , other persons because of the underlying need However, a greater percentage of the res- for positive evaluation from people. \, pondents said that they do haggle; although the frequency of e'n~g "in this behavior People definitely have different reasons for differs among them. 'These people haggle haggling. Most are motivated by.economic. primarily to economize - "Siyempre, kaila- necessity but others by certain psychological "gang tumawad upang makabili nang mura at satisfactions that they derive either from the makatipid, mapakinabangan nang husto ang pera." One female 'college student commented , that "Nowadays a person who does not haggle.wnenever possible and necessary may be , , 1 Most of the respondents belong to the Jow-mcome and middle-mcome classes.  PAGTAWAD: HAGGLING BEHAVIOR 27 act itself or from its result. Pen (1952) called tend to avoid haggling situations. "Madali this the "ludic" element behind the economic akong madala ng salita; baka maloko pa ako ophelimity which is the satisfaction derived ng tindera." (I am easily convinced by words; from the attainment of a certain price. Pen the seller may fool me.) In terms of choices, continued by citing an example: "The attain- the aggressive and persuasive individual would ing of a certain result may have a certain most likely choose rather bold strategies such value in itself, just as the hunter who shoots a as derogating the quality of the store or the , rabbit will derive a certain satisfaction from it, commodity - ("Wala ka namang binabayarang r quite apart from the expected pleasure of his puwesto, para sidewalk lang naman ito." or dinner." Similarly, when and how to haggle "Mukhang bulok na nga yang tinda mo.") or depends upon certain personality variables plus "threat" appeal - ("Sige pakaingatan mo yang a host of environmental determinants sur- tinda mo at mabubulok din iyan; Sa halip na rounding the act. The following section maging pera, lalo kang nawalan: "]. The cool explains the factors affecting one's choice of and calculating type of personality may resort haggling strategies when haggling is deemed to comparisons - ("Di bale na lang; marami necessary and possible. It 'also analyzes the pa namang mabibilhang ibang tindahan - mas common strategies employed by Filipino con- mura pa:") which is often accompanied by the sumers using certain psychological concepts. gesture of pretending to leave. \\bile the soft- -spoken sympathetic consumer may usc the The Various Haggling Strategies emotive appeal - ("Ale, bawasan mo naman nang kaunti at baka wala na akong ipama- Factors Affecting the Choice of the Proper Haggling Strategy K~rt Lewin (I936) has proposed that an sahe. ") Situational or environmental determinants individual's behavior may be considered as a also play an important role. in ft,e person's function of two parameters: E (environment) decision to haggle or not and his choice of and P (person). In relation to the present haggling strategy. To the query, "Tumatawad analysis, E consists of the set of external ka ba kapag namimui?"> many answered, structural pressures that operate both to moti- "Depende"... which means "depende sa vate and to temper the behavior of individuals lugar na binibilhan, sa bagay no bibilhin at sa in a haggling situation. P, on the other hand, taong binibilhan;" The determinants cited consists of the individual's needs, beliefs, and include the place of buying, the object/item values, the set of enduring predispositions he to be bought and the person from whom it is carries from situation to situation. to be bought. Individual differences in background (such Haggling behavior is commonly observed in as sex, age, status, etc.) as well as individual public markets such as Divisoria and Central, differences in personality (such as his inherent 2 in talieapa and sidewalk vending places. cooperativeness, authoritarianism, risk-taking Stall owners or renters in public markets may propensity, etc.), may selectively shape the price their goods relatively higher than side- course of haggling. For instance, the inter- walk vendors do. This is primarily due to views revealed that those individuals who are economic reasons such as they have to pay for high risk-takers and aggressive tend to haggle more frequently because they regard the hag- gling situation as a challenge and an opportu- 2 Using the non-reactive method of p0gmJlmJ1std. nity to put their mettle to a test. On the other hand, persons who perceive themselves masid, the researchers observed haggling in public markets (Divisoria, Trabajo and Quinta) and side- walks of Quiapo and M. dela Fuente in Sampaloc. to be easily persuaded (high on persuasibility)  28 MILAGRO E. DU and ROLANDAPAYSU the stall and license to operate. However, the initial price at once or.may haggle but will these sellers do.not usually give initial prices ask for only a minimal discount. that are too high ("hindi masyadong mataas ang turing"). Thus, they also settle for.mini- Closely interacting with ,the place of buying mum discounts only ("kaunti lang ang is the type, of commodity to be bought. tawad"). ·On the other hand, sidewalkvendors Details will not be explained here anymore,' It may sell· out their goods at prices lower tha~ is sufficient to say that for food items and those in the public markets, They may have 'other easily perishable commodities, prices are economic reasons for this - they do not have fairly' stable due to the characteristics of the to pay for the use of any stall and it is quite commodities, price control measures and com- unlikely' that they have licenses· to operate, petition; while for luxury items and' other arid - they. want all their goods. to be sold non-perishable commodities, prices may flue- out (especially for easily perishable commodi- tuate depending upon several factors' such: as ties) within the shortest time possible because the demand for the commodity, competition; they have to avoid unexpected police raids etc. and confiscation of their goods, The re- 'Haggling in market scenes is basically a searchers are' referring to those sidewalk dyadic interaction between the buyer and. vendors who have' neither licenses nor even seller. The buyer usually initiates the haggling temporary permits to sell along the sidewalks. but depending upon whether the seller will Others do have,.sUch ~ magazine stands, allow it or not. All respondents said that they sellers of belts, bands of watches, and other tend to ask first the permission of the seller items. In connection with police raids, how to haggle followed by, "Kung tatflWfld ako, disheartening it. must be for both buyer and huwag kang magagalit." Some buyers even seller that just after a successful haggle (may- assess.the sellers, first before they ask permis-. be' the goods has been paid for but the change sion to ,hhggIe. They are reluctant to do so if has not been given yet or the buyer is just they perceive the seller to be masungit about to pay for the item), the policemen (cranky), mainit ang ulo (hot-headed) or may. would so suddenly come to apprehendithe sumixmg (in one.of ,his bad moods). If the vendors. Lucky are those who Can flee and seller is perceived to be mabait (nice): then 'have their goods still with them. However, it the emotive appeal may prove effective. If the could also be due to this high. risk associated seller looks suplada '(sno~), an aggres- with sidewalk vending that these vendors si\~e buyer may 'be.challenged to use deroga- would I look for and grab all opportunities for tion' or' 'threat appeal. This is because' the maximizing their profit - "Kung may maiisa- 'mere appearance or image of the seller encour- hang customer, talagang; iisahan nila" (If they ages hostile behavior from the buyer. It is not can get the most out of their customers, they unusual that such 'haggling situation ends up will really do so). Thus sidewalk vendors. in a tongue-lashing fight between the buyer assess their buyers {kinikilatis], If the buyer is and.seller, Many of the respondents admitted /perceived to be financially stable (mukhang having been in such unpleasant encounters maykaya} and seems to be inexperienced in with Yendors;some however, were tempered sidewalk buying (hindi Sllnay 0' bagito sa pami-.by,their strong self-control, ,. mili sa sidewalk), , \. sidewalk vendors give. him/her initial prices that are too high " All the factors discussed above interact in (possibly triple the true price). They dothis influencing an individual's choice of which because they perceive that these buyers think haggling strategy to, adopt and they also deter- that. prices of goods sold along sidewalks are mine the effectivity of such strategy. In the definitely much lower. DUe to thismisconcep- tiori, these buyers will.most likely settle ,for next section, specific haggling strategies will be. described within..the..context of situations.  PAGTAWAD: HAGGLING BEHAVIOR 29 in which they usually occur. Hopefully, this hindi yata tama yon. Kaya nga ako nagtitiya- discussion will elucidate the interaction of gang makipagsiksikan dito e para makamura:" both environmental and person-related vari- In this case the buyer resorts to comparison ables. also but in a slightly different sense, Ile compares the status of the other potential The Different Haggling Strategies3 source with that of the present source (like a department store is compared with a sidewalk The specific strategies mentioned and vending comer). The customer can easily jus- claimed to be effectively used by the respon- dents are categorized into two: I) cognitive approaches - most often employed by indivi- tify the high price demand of a reputable source but not the imbalance created by a less reputable source demanding the same duals who are cool, calculating, given to amount (or even more). He wants the seller to weighing advantages and disadvantages of any realize this imbalance so the latter wiD charge act; the appeal is rational, directed toward the a more reasonable price. seller's sense of judgment or evaluation, and 2) emotional approaches - most often em- ployed by persons who are quite sensitive Derogating the commodity. "Sige no ibigay themselves; the appeal is effective, directed mo na sa tawad ko; maliliit no ngt..' iyang tinda toward the seller's kind-heartedness, inherent mo at saka pinagpilian na lang iyan." This cooperativeness, compassion and ability to strategy is commonly used by buyers of food sympathize. commodities (those that are perishable such as fruits, vegetables, etc.) who go to the market Haggling strategies using the cognitive ap- proach rather late ("tanghali na 0 gabi na"]. Most likely, the only available cemmodities are Citing another source of the desired com- practically "left-over alternatives" of early modity which offers it at a lower price. "Don customers. The buyer directly attempts to nga sa isang tindahan binibigay na sa akin sa change the vendor's attitude toward his goods. g,anitong halaga, kaya lang nagbabakasakali pa The vendor thinks that his goods are of a tayong makamura: " When a customer uses this certain worth (in terms of money) based on strategy he informs the vendor that he has his puhunan (investment) on these goods, So other alternatives that can offer comparable or he says to himself, "Puwede ptlng mabili even greater satisfaction. The vendor, realizing bukas; "By derogating the quality of the commodity, the buyer makes the vendor that he has effective competitors, accepts that he has less control of the situation. Thus, he realize that his goods are not of that worth anymore; In fact, he will be at the losing end gives in to the demand price of the buyer. if his goods get rotten without being sold. Thus the vendor decreases the selling price of Citing another source of the desired com- his goods just to sell them out. More often modity which is more reputable than the than not, in situations like these, the vendor is present source. Therefore, this reputable also in a hurry to end his business for that source can demand a higher price while the day. Therefore, little argument is necessary. present source should not. "Ale, ang presyo The haggling situation will most likely be, ng tinda mo pang-department store naman, concluded with the buyer buying aU the re· maining goods at a considerably reduced price; we call this pinakyaw ng mamimili. 3 These strategies were derived using the method of pagtatarwng-tanong, a non-reactive indigenous re- search method based on non-structured interview- ing. Pretending that one is not in great need of the commodity. liAng totoo marami pa akong 30 MILAGROE. DU and ROLANDA PAYSU "hanger" sa bahay kaya lang gag~win itong buyer). Again, if this strategy proves success- (binibiling hanger) "project" ng anak ko sa ful, the end result of the haggling situation"is eskuwela," The vendor thinks that he is in. for the buyer to pakyaw the commodities.. great control of the situation if he perceives the buyer as having a pressing need. for the Haggling strategies using the emotional ap- commodity. Thus, the buyer using this stra- proach '. tegy "plays it cool". He regards the commo- Pleading for sympathy. "Pare-pareho naman dity with a "matter of fact" attitude, inform- tayong" naghihirap. lkaw gusto mong kumita ing the vendor that he is not serious about buying it. Because of this impression.that the ic"ahit kaunti; ako naman pinipilit kong pagkas- yahin itong dala kong pera. Magbigayan na customer gives to the vendor, he gains greater lang tayo. Bawasan mo nang konti ang presyo control of the buying situation. Comparatively ng tinda mo." Filipinos are generally emo- speaking, the vendor now has the greater need tional people - "madaling mabagbilg ang kalo- to make a sale and this need has to be dban.at maawain" (easily touched' and feel satisfied. Of course, how salient the need of pity readily). Mariy buyers capitalize,on ~ the vendor becomes depends on several factors Filipino trait. They plead for discounts claim- like the general sales trend for that day or ingthat they can afford only that much with week, the characteristics of the commodity, their limited resources. Remarks' such 'as: the personality of the vendor, etc. Because of 'M;'ami akong anak na pinapakain," or "Bed- the greater need to make a sale.. the vendor spacer'lang ako dito kaya ako nogtitipid"'or gives in to the price demand of the buyer;. "Kukulangin ako ng pamasahe,": are often Along the same line of reasoning, it is not heard in public markets and sidewalks, These wise' for parents to have their children tag vendors who are also financially hard-up can along with them when they go.on a shopping easily sympathize" with their not-well-to-do spree. These children would usually pout and customers. Certainly, this is a manifestation bf cry, saying "Nay, gusto ko yon," while point- ing to the items. that they find attractive. in the Filipino's' pan indigan of "pakikipagkap'wa (hum"anconcernand interaction as one with Sellers see this as an opportunity for making a others, Enriquez, 1977). Some respondents "good" sale. Some parents, embarassed by the said that when you shop in these places, you behavior of their children and wanting to must look pangkaraniwan long (ordinary and pacify them, may immediately buy the item casual). "Nalinisiang mga tindera sa mgama- without haggling anymore, or if they do, it is mimiling kuntodo de ayos pero tawad. nang only minimal..tawad. " (Sellers are irritated by customers who " are' well-dressed but keep 'on haggling)..Offering to buy more of the commodity if. , the seller gives it all the desired price of the Ingratiation tactic: a little amount of flat- customer. "Kung ibibigay mo sa-presyong tery. "Mamang pogi, sige na naman ho, bigyan gusto leo, kukuha ako nang marami" 'This na ninyo ako ng discount. Marami ,kaming ciearly is a strategy that makes the interdepen- dence between the buyer and seller salient. The buyer attempts, to influence the seller's decision by making a "promise." A "promise" bibilhin." This is not a very common strategy because' of the obvious artificiality that it may connote and therefore may not be effective. However; depending on who uses this strategy 1 is an expressed intention to behave in a way and for whom it is used, "it may also be that appears beneficial to the interests of effective. It has been employed effectively by another (Rubin & Brown, 1975). By making a some teen-age lasses or young women who "promise", the buyer hopes to reward the make purchases in groups, particularly from a seller for the latter's performance of a parti- Vendor.'Yho is a t(lep~age lad or young man. A cular behavior that" isbeneficia1 to him (the closely similar concept to flattery in Tagalog r PAGTAWAD: HAGGLING BEHAVIOR 31 slang is bola or pambobola may be emotive "Ang dami 'ko ng bitbit." Wh.ereupon, the because people may still respond to it favor- woman exclaimed. "Hus; ikaw nagmamalaki ably even if they are conscious of it - "Sige na. lbinibigay na nga sa iyo nang mura, utang na nga, magpapabola na lang ako sa iyo. " This pa, ayaw pa. Hayan, me kasama ku naman: attitude to pambobola may explain the Eh, anak mo ba iyan?.. And they effectiveness of a little amount of flattery in exchanged the latest news about their haggling. children. According to the mother, similar incidents have happened many times before The division of the various haggling strate- gies just discussed is an arbitrary one, depend- with different vendors (mga suki 'in niya). Clearly, this would point out that a special ing upon the researchers' frame of mind and relationship exists between the Fillpino buyer focus of interest. The truth is, most haggling and his suki: This relationship :'s marked by situations are best represented as mixture of mutual trust and concern for each other. the two approaches with the predominance of Thus, remarks such as, "Suki, mukhang umu· the emotional ingredient. In the heart of the unlad na ang tindahan mo," or "Umaasenso economic world, where money and profits na yata tayo," are not uncommon. define everything, the Filipino paninindigan of pakikipagkapwa may still stand out parti- To summarize, this section has C:~escribed cularly among these middle-income merchants the various haggling strategies commonly and vendors whose living conditions may be employed by Filipino consumers taking into aptly described as a hand-to-mouth existence. account the surrounding variables (personality The simple and ordinary Filipino merchant or and situational) that determine their effecti- seller must certainly think of profits but not vity. to the point of exacting too much from his kapwa tao. This Filipino value for personalism In the next section, an attempt to integrate even in his business activities is best seen in all these strategies will be made by citing the the concept of suki: Panganiban (1972) in his common elements that are essential to any Diksyunaryo Tesauro defines suk! as a long- haggling situation. For this matter, haggling standing customer or patron. Its synonyms in will be analyzed within the broader context of Tagalo are parokyano and dating mamimili: bargaining. But a suki is more than a customer for a Filipino merchant. At the very least, he is The SoclaI Psychology Of Bargaining regarded as' a kaki1Jllil (acquaintance); at the It was the economists who first studied most, as a kaibigan (a friend). bargaining experimentally. Buyers and sellers have to agree on price and quantity of goods Consider the following incident. In order to exchanged, and bargaining constitutes an do pagmamasid-rruzsid for this study, one of exchange of bids between the players. Agree- the researchers went with her mother to the ments between the two parties rr.ay not public market of Trabajo, Sampaloc, Manila. always be reached easily. Thus, arguments and When they were almost through with their counterarguments may ensue between them. It marketing, one woman fruit vendor called for is at this point that the elaborate art of the mother, "Suki, halika bilhin mo na nga haggling is employed. Thus, according to the ang mga ito" (pointing to the fruits). They OED, to bargain is "to haggle over terms of approach her improvised stall. The mother give and take" (Morley & Stephenson, 1977, replied, "Kulang na ang pera ko para bilhin p. 18). This definition focuses on the ideal iyan." The woman answered, "Basta kunin mo na at saka mo na bayaran. Palogi ka namang namamalengke dito." The mother complained, end result of the process, that is, the benefit that each party ought to receive (gi.ve and take). This end result is usually achieved  32 MILAGRO E.-DU and ROLANDA PAYSU through haggling. Thus, haggling is a process limits, each person supposedly seeks to maxi- that takes place within a bargaining situation mize his positive outcomes from the inter- before ,an agreement is reached. Perhaps, a action, that is, he Win attempt to getas many more detailed and informative defmition will benefits as he can with as little cost as clarify this point. Brown (1964) said, "Bar-.possible. , With' the least amount of money gaining denotes. the process of argument; (cost), the buyer seeks to obtain more. goods persuasion, threat, proposal andcounterpro- of good quality (positive outcome or benefit): posal ,by which the potential parties to a With the least amount. of investment (cost), transaction discuss its terms and possibly 'reach agreement on them" (p. 50). In this the seller strives to' sell all of his goods at the price that will yield the. greatest profit (posi- definition, the process of haggling has been tive outcome' or benefit). Thus, the immediate broken down into the specific behavior. of result of bargaining activity is that each party argument, persuasion, threat, proposal and 'receives some positive outcome. And it is a counterproposal, Parties engage in such beha- critical"characteristic of 'bargaining activity viors in order to discuss their terms and that these outcomes be interdependent. AI; a hopefully reach an agreement. In the. light,of consequence of theii: outcome dependence, this discussion, the process of haggling within the parties are confronted with what Kelley the broader context of bargaining in which it (1966)' has referred. to' as the' "dilemma of Occurs will be analyzed in the next section. goals." Each party would like to come to an This analysis will identify the antecedents and agreement which places him above his own consequents of haggling. comparison level (his minimum level of expec- 'tation). In pushing for such an agreement, he A General Analysis of Haggling within must follow a course between two risks. On the Context of Bargaining the.one hand, in driving too hard for an In this study, bargaining is considered in its agreement which maximizes his own gain (in narrow sense; that is, of arranging an exchange being too "tough and persistent"), he may of goods in a given market. Any bargaining provide the other party with so unsatisfactory relationship involves at least two parties. They an: outcome that the' other refusestoconcede.may be individuals, small groups or more 'o~ leaves the relationship ("Sige;' huwog'no complex social units. Bargaining in a market lang, sa lba na lang"]: On the other hand, in scene usually involves two persons only, a not driving hard enough for a desired agree- buyer and a seller. Each' of these persons is ment (in being too '''soft and Yielding"), each unique due to individualdifferences in back- may end up providing. the other With too ground (such as bargainer's sex, race, age, good an outcome, thereby settling for less than status, etc.) as well as individual differences in necessary. This often leads to either a post- personality "(such as a: bargainer's inherent. purchase! dissonance on the part of the buyer, cooperativeness, authoritarianism, risk-taking ("Napamahal yata eng bili ko") or apost-sale propensity, etc.), They also differ in the-needs "dissonance on the part of the seller' ("Napa- they have to satisfy and the resources' they mura-yata ang benta ko"]: In resolving this can offer. They come to the market place, dilemma, each partymust decide on a reason- each hoping to satisfy his own needs through able 'settlement.,.' one 'which will, yield the ,the use of one's own resources. The seller has most for him while, at the same time, having his goods to offer (resources) in exchange for a good chance of being acceptable' to the money (need), The buyer has to buy certain. other side: Thus 'each party must seek a commondities (needs) using his money (re- solution to' the' bargaining' problem (the sources). Thus buyer and seller, by voluntary minimax solution) that represents the best he choice, engage in an interaction'which can-be can obtain In the face of the other's opposi- viewed as a kind of exchange. WithiiJ. certain tion (RUDin &' Brown, 1915, p. 11).. l PAGTAWAD: HAGGLING BEHAVIOR 33 is in this search for this "minimax plained by the shared conflict between the solution" that both parties have to engage in need for information and restraints against the elaborate "art of haggling." As has been providing it" (p, 58). Kelley explains further discussed in the previous section, the choice these needs and restraints in terms of two. of specific haggling strategies to be employed related dilemmas. depends on both environmental or situational determinants (all the aspects and elements in First of all, in satisfying their need for the individual's physical and social environ- information about the other's position, each ment) and the persons involved. As persons party must resolve the "dilemma of trust," enter into a bargaining relationship, they bring Kelley (1966) says: "To believe everything the with them variations in prior experience, back- other person says is to place one's fate in his ground, needs, beliefs, values and outlook that hand and to jeopardize full satisfaction of may affect the manner and effectiveness with one's own interest.. on the other hand, to which they interact. Whether the buyer believe nothing the other says is tc eliminate elected to use the cognitive or emotive the possibility of accepting a':1Y arrangement approach, the haggling activity usually involves with him "{p. 60), At some point :\r. their the presentation of proposals (demands, re- relationship, each party is confronted with thG quests, pleadings) by one party, evaluation of critical problem of having to :!.1fer the otl1er'H these by the other, followed by concessions true intentions, interests and preferences from and counterproposals (cotinterdemands, coun- his behavior, Thus, each party makes attribu- terrequests, counterpleadings). The activity is tions about the causes or; one's behavior. thus sequential rather than simultaneous. In order to haggle effectively, each must Where the relationship JIs predominantly governed by mutual trust (~S in the seller and his suki relationship), the other's behavior acquire information about the other's prefe- can be taken as 8 srue indication of his rences and the other's comparison level of underlying disposition. lin relationsbtps ruled alternatives (Thibaut & Kelly, 1959) defined by mutual suspicion, on the other h.and, tho as "the standard the member uses in deciding parties must each develop a translation scheme whether to remain in or to leave the relation- which permits them to decipher what the ship ,. , the lowest level of outcomes a other really means. In either case, in deciding member will accept in the light of available which agreement to push far ard which to alternative opportunities (p. 21)." But this is accept, each party must leam. to make attribu.. information that only the other party can tions about the other's true intentions in provide. Each party is thus dependent on the which he can have some minimal degree of other not only for the outcomes he receives confidence. but for information that will allow him to structure his own preferences and correspond- As a second consideration, in their reluc- ing haggling stance accordingly, Kelley & tance to provide the other with the accurate Thibaut (1969) have called this characteristic information he needs and seeks, each must as "information dependence." Ideally, each resolve what Kelley has described as the party would like to obtain maximal informa- "dilemma of honesty and openness." Morgan tion about the other's preferences, while at (1949) described bargaining power as the the same time disclosing minimal (or even power to fool and bluff, "the ability to set misleading) information about his own posi- the best price for yourself and fool the other tion. Kelley has clarified this point excellen- man into thinking this was your maximum tly: "How information is exchanged in these negotiations and why this exchange takes the complex and tortured form it does is ex- offer." Schelling (1956) says there are two kinds of fooling. One is deceiving about the facts; a buyer may lie about Hs income or  j 34 MILAGRO.E. DU and 'ROLANDA PAYSU misrepresent the size of his family. The other that haggling requires that each party makes is purely tactical. Whatever it is, haggling attributions about the other's intentions, it is always has some form of "cover story" or expected that individuals- who make disposi- some form.of deception. scheme. Now, inas- tional attributions will differ from individuals much as information must at least appear to who make situational attributions· in their.be" exchanged in order that haggling activity choices of the-approach (cognitive or emotive) remains viable, each party is confronted' with in haggling; the problem of deciding howfrank or deceit- To test this hypothesis, the following inves- ful he should be. Being completely frank may tigation may be undertaken: commit· one to a position. from \w,hich it is difficult to move at a later time.' Moreover, to The procedure will' include two major steps. First:. By setting up the appro- be frank in the face of.a deceptive or. priate experimental conditions, subjects exploitative other is to risk exploitation by (randomly chosen from a population him. Thus, there are real advantages to be properly described) will be classified gained by concealing information that could into two categories: 1) those who tend be turned against oneself at a later time. On to make dispositional attributions; and the other hand, each party must be able to 2) those who tend to make situational convince the other that he is being honest and attributions. Second: The classified sub- open about his position. To sustain the bar- jects will be brought to the real market gaining relationship, each party must select a or bargaining situation. They will be middle course between the extremes of com- asked to engage in haggling in as many plete operiness toward and total deception of the other. Each must be able to convince the other of his integrity while at the same time situations as possible. Their preference for one approach over the other will then be determined. not endangering his haggling position. Why Study. Bargaining At the end of this intricate mutual attempt The greater bulk of the content of this to influence each other, a 'satisfactory binding paper is a discussion of haggling within the agreement is eventually reached (hopefully). context of bargaiaing, Thus, whatever insights The' specific bargaining relationship is con- can be derived from this endeavor will lead to cluded. If the outcomes for both parties are further understanding of the bargaining rela- primarily positive, each will regard the' inter- tionship. What is the importance of examining action as rewarding. Most likely,' the buyer this' social psychological process?.. and theseller will look forward to entering into similar bargaining relationships with each The bargaining process has a direct rele- other. Another sulci relationship is therefore vance. to the world of everyday events. At established -. almost every moment of our lives, we are often engaged in some form of bargaining. Thus, when studied- in its local color (indige- An Attempt In Hypothesis Formulation nous), certain values, idiosyncracies, predispo- And Testing. sitions, etc. of a particular group, of people From the' mass of data gathered through may' be revealed and identified or confirmed. the use 'of the nonreactive methods specified in previous - sections of this paper and from Bargaining is a clear example' of social the related findings of other researchers, a interaction. It is not only impossible but also simple hypothesis was formulated and a pos- sible design to test it was proposed. The insensible to discuss the psycho-social dyna-· mics of a sirigle bargainer. The primary re- hypothesis' can be stated thus: To the extent quirement for a bargaining relationship to I r PAGTAWAD, HAGGUNG BEHAVIOR 35 Bargaining is a clear example of social Handbook of Social Psychology (2nd cd.), VoL 4. interaction. It is not only impossible but also Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, H69. insensible to discuss the psycho-social dyna- LEWIN, KURT. Principles of Topological J'syclzo- mics of a single bargainer. The primary re- logy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936. quirement for a bargaining relationship to MATARAGNON, R.H. A conceptual and psycholo- exist is the existence of two parties who have gical analysis of sumpong. Philippine Journal of voluntarily agreed to enter such relationship. Psychology. 1977,10, 45-52. ~. The relationship between them is charac- terized by mutuality and interdependence. MORGAN, J.N. Bilateral monopoly and the competi- tive output. Quarterly Joumal of Economics; For these reasons, we can regard the bargain- 1949, 63, 376 pp. ing relationship as a "microcosm within which MORLEY, I.E. and STEPHENSON, G.M. TIl(: Social many of the causes and consequences of social Psychology of Bargaining. London: George Allen interaction and interdependence may be fruit- & Unwin Ltd., 1977. fully examined (Rubin & Brown, 1975, p. PANGANlBAN, l. Dlksyunaryo Tesauro: P'lipino- 3)." Ingles. Quezon City: Manlapaz Publishing Co., 1972. PEN, J. A general theory of bargaining, American Economic Review, 1952, 42, 2442- REFERENCES RUBIN, J. Z. and BROWN, B.a. The SodalPsycho- BROWN, E.H.P. Bargaining. In Gould, r, and lolb, logy of Bargaining and Negotiation. New York: W.L (eds.), A Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Academic Press, 1975. Glencoe: Free Press, 1964. ENRIQUEZ, V.G. Filipino psychology in the third SANTIAGO, ac and ENRIQUEZ, V.G. Tungo sa maka-Pilipinong pananaliksik. Sikolohiyang Pili· world. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 1977; pino: Mga Ulot at Balita, June, 1976, 1 (4), 3-10. 10, 3-16. SCHELUNG, TOMAS C. An essay on bargaining. KELLEY, H.H. A classroom study of the dilemmas The American Economic Review, 195fi, 46, in the interpersonal negotiations. In Archabald, 281-306. Kathleen (ed.), Strategic Interaction and Conflict. Berkeley California; Institute of International THIBAUT, J.W. and KELLEY, H.H. The Social Studies, University of California, 1966. Psychology of Groups. New York: Wiley, 1959. KELLEY, H.H. and TIDBAUT, l.W. Group problem WODEHOUSE, P.G. Aunts Aren't Gentlemen. solving. In G.' Undzey and E. Aronson (eds.), London: Barrie and Jenkins, 1974.