Search

This paper analyses the activity of Zigmas Žemaitis, a public figure, initiator and leader of Higher Courses in Kaunas, and later professor of the University of Lithuania (since 1930 – Vytautas Magnus University) seeking to return Vilnius to Lithuania in 1920–1922. Born and residing in East Lithuania, Žemaitis was well acquainted with the mindset and problems of the Polish-speaking population of this region and he was convinced that only Lithuania could guarantee them adequate economic conditions and cultural rights. During the restoration of the state of Lithuania, Žemaitis started publishing books in the Polish language, in which he tried to influence the opinion of the Polish-speaking population of Eastern Lithuania. This activity was noticed and positively assessed by the Lithuanian government. At the end of the 1920 Žemaitis participated in the Lithuanian-Polish negotiations in Warsaw, where he actively worked behind the scenes and met with political figures from Poland and the Vilnius region. He participated in the informal negotiations of the representatives of the left factions of the Lithuanian Constituent Seimas with the Polish political groups in Vilnius in 1921. He was chairman of the East Lithuania Commission in 1921–1922. This activity has not been researched so far, therefore, the article aims to clarify Žemaitis’ attitude towards Vilnius and the Vilnius region in 1918–1920, to investigate his contribution to the Lithuanian-Polish negotiations, to analyse his role in the negotiations with the Polish political groups in Vilnius, and to examine his activities in the East Lithuania Commission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Year-Book of Lithuanian History / Lietuvos Istorijos Metraštis is the property of Lithuanian Institute of History and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Public Security & Public Order / Visuomenes Saugumas ir Viesoji Tvarka is the property of Mykolas Romeris University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Lituanistica is the property of Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Straipsnis nagrinėja moralinės legitimacijos teorijų sąveiką su komunikacinio veiksmo, poelgio ir derybų koncepcijomis, atsižvelgiant į klasikinių racionalumo idealų kritiką ir Habermaso silpnąją transcendentalinės pragmatikos nuostatą. Straipsnio tikslas yra parodyti moralinės legitimacijos, jos procedūrų epistemologinės apklausos svarbą šiuolaikinei įvairovės visuomenei. Legitimacijos tema nagrinėjama atsižvelgiant į Weberio, Arendt ir Habermaso samprotavimus. Straipsnis papildo moralinio komunikacinio veiksmo ir normatyvumo teorijas moralinio laikiškumo, pasaulio įvykio ir poelgio sampratomis ir teigia: kritinės teorijos požiūriu moralinė legitimacija remiasi galimai universaliomis komunikacinio veiksmo, derybų ir pakankamumo idėjomis, kurios priklauso nuo politinio daugialypumų proceso. Straipsnyje pateikiami argumentai, susiję komunikacine kritika: autoriteto ir statuso, institucinės subordinacijos, klasikinių racionalumo idealų, etinio reliatyvizmo, bei kalbama apie pasitikėjimo kaupimą, vertybių derinimą ir konkurenciją. Straipsnio argumentai dėstomi atsižvelgiant į daugialypumų vienovės dinamiką, į pasaulio civilizacinės ir kultūrinės įvairovės plėtrą ir augančią asmens ir grupių dinamikos reikšmę. Nuosekliai atsisakoma pamatiškumo idėjos ją pakeičiant pakankamos legitimacijos, atviros politikos ir derybų statuso sampratomis bei jas aiškinant.

The modern business is developing in the context of rapid social and political changes, which contributes to the changes in economic and cultural priorities as well as mindset and behaviour of people. This puts new requirements on development and implementation of business negotiation strategies, aiming to ensure that during bargaining, everything is done to understand the other party and related contexts, to achieve mutual understanding, to reach common agreement and eventually find the optimal negotiating decision. The author of this article researched and analysed negotiation process concepts in the global scientific literature and practice. The article examines negotiation and bargaining concepts. Also, the global analysis of the scientific literature revealed that there is no single negotiation planning concept. The author defines the basic conceptual negotiation planning concepts. The paper deals with negotiation strategy conceptions used by scientists around the world. Conclusions present the proposals for further business negotiation research. Santrauka Šiuolaikinis verslas vystosi sparčių socialinių politinių ir technologinių pokyčių kontekste, darančiame įtaką ekonomikos ir kultūros prioritetų kaitai, mąstymo ir elgesio pokyčiams. Tai kelia naujus reikalavimus verslo derybų strategijų parengimui ir įgyvendinimui užtikrinti, kad būtų suplanuota ir realizuota derybinių veiksmų visuma, leidžianti suprasti kitą derybų pusę įvairiose situacijose, pasiekti tarpusavio supratimą, pasiekti bendrą susitarimą ir galiausiai rasti optimalų derybinį sprendimą. Autorius šiame straipsnyje pateikia derybų ciklo ir derybų procesų pasaulinės mokslinės literatūros bei praktikos analizę. Straipsnyje yra analizuojamos derybų ir derėjimosi sąvokos. Taip pat iš pasaulinės mokslinės literatūros analizės yra daroma išvada, jog nėra vieno bendro derybų sąvokų traktavimo. Autorius apibrėžia pagrindines koncepcines derybų sąvokas. Darbe yra nagrinėjami įvairių pasaulio mokslininkų požiūriai apie derybų strategijos sampratą. Darbo išvadose yra pateikiamos tolesnių verslo derybų tyrimų kryptys. Reikšminiai žodžiai: derybos, derybų strategija, derėjimasis, derybų ciklas, derybų strateginiai sprendimai.

Copyright of Problems / Problemos is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Management / Vadyba (16487974) is the property of Lithuania Business University of Applied Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Socialinių Mokslų Studijos is the property of Mykolas Romeris University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Science: Future of Lithuania / Mokslas: Lietuvos Ateitis is the property of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Business: Theory & Practice is the property of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Business Economics & Management is the property of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Business Economics & Management is the property of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The recent Lithuanian legal doctrine and court practice shows discrepancies in cases dealing with pre-contractual liability. There is no consensus on this issue in the legal writings as well. Opinions vary especially on the question of which type of liability rules - contractual, tort or sui generis - should be applied in the case of breaking off negations in bad faith. In this article the authors argue that in order to ensure legal certainty and stability it is necessary to establish clear scope of pre-contractual liability and to identify precisely the liability rules which apply in such cases. Research on the historical developments on pre-contractual liability in different European countries shows that most legal systems recognize the need to govern the parties' relations at the contract formation stage. However, until today legal systems vary on the approaches towards it, especially in respect of its scope and on the way it should be imposed: some civil law jurisdictions generally recognize this duty as a general principle of law, and some of them provide for specific provisions establishing its framework. In the second part of this article it is discussed whether the rule requiring the parties to negotiate in good faith and the claim for pre-contractual liability of a defendant is a matter of tort, contract or quasi-contract. The authors argue that in order to qualify pre-contractual liability it necessary to identify the nature of negotiations and the factors determining the scope of liability for their breach. Taking into account the specific legal rules on obligations of parties in pre-contractual relationships established in the Civil Code of Lithuania, as well as the current court practice on this issue, the authors conclude that there is no sufficient justification to apply in full contractual or tort legal regimes for the pre-contractual stage. Firstly, an ultimate factor determining the establishment of liability in precontractual stage is reliance between the negotiating parties. It is recognised that in such relations the aggrieved party may recover only the expenses incurred during the negotiations and the lost opportunity to conclude another contract with a third person (a so-called reliance or negative interest), but it is not possible to claim the profit which would have resulted had the original contract been concluded (a so-called expectation or positive interest). It proves that there is no enough ground to qualify pre-contractual liability as contractual. Otherwise, it is possible to violate the parties' autonomy and their freedom of contract. Only if the relations of the parties may be qualified as contractual, will all the remedies for breach of contract be available to them, including the remedy of the right of performance. Secondly, under a general rule, an understanding that negotiations involve inevitable risk and that the parties are free to contract means that no responsibility could be established. Therefore, the proper question to ask is whether at the end of the negotiations the parties have concluded a contract. Only if a contract is formed, the courts will focus on the contract to understand the relations and obligations between the parties. In case of ambiguity, the court may analyze other evidence. If no contract is formed, the obligations between the parties usually have to be treated under tort law. However, a tort regime sometimes is not sufficient for the protection of the interest of the aggrieved party. Besides, when the parties conclude a preliminary agreement the extent of liability is set not only by the rules of the statute but also by the preliminary agreement of the parties.… [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Remiantis eksperimentiniais duomenimis, žmonės, sulaukę tokios pačios derybų pabaigos, vertina ją kaip santykinę sėkmę ar nesėkmę, priklausomai nuo to, koks buvo minimalus priimtinas ir maksimalus galimas rezultatas. Tyrimo rezultatai taip pat rodo, jog maksimalus galimas rezultatas daro didesnę įtaką derybų dalyvio sėkmės jausmui nei minimalus priimtinas rezultatas. Minimalaus priimtino ir maksimalaus galimo rezultatų sąveika rodo, jog šių kintamųjų poveikis sėkmei nėra suminis.