The resources that individual negotiators need to solve their problems are not available in a single, concentrated form, and they are certainly not available only within an isolated dyad itself. Instead, the necessary resources are widely dispersed among many actors within networks of business relationships. The best deal is unlikely to be fixed or predetermined, but is rather the outcome of long and time‐consuming negotiations that will then affect further negotiations. In this article, I describe a network perspective on negotiation that considers the relevance and impact of three phenomena that I call (1) vast connectivity, (2) multiple constitutions, and (3) ongoing consent. I further illustrate the applicability of these three factors using examples of real‐life negotiations.

Experienced negotiators know that it is often impossible to define all terms of a complex agreement. By negotiating umbrella agreements, the negotiating parties try to balance the need for certainty and calculability of give‐and‐take processes with the need to remain sufficiently flexible to embrace new or emerging business opportunities. Umbrella agreements describe a joint consent that explicitly articulates a framework of rules and principles that guides future agreements. It is argued that negotiators are better able to maximize their joint gains if they differentiate between agreements and the framework in which agreements are made.