IMPLEMENTING TOULMIN'S ARGUMENT PATTERNS FROM SHARK TANK GLOBAL YOUTUBE INTO THE CREATION OF DATA-DRIVEN NEGOTIATION TEMPLATES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21009/ishel.v2i1.69565Keywords:
toulmin's argument pattern, negotiation, shark tank, data-driven negotiation template, business communication skillsAbstract
This study aims to identify the components of Toulmin's Argument Pattern (TAP) that appear in successful negotiations on the American edition of Shark Tank on YouTube and to translate the findings into a Data-Driven Negotiation Template (DDNT) for Indonesian entrepreneurs. Using a descriptive qualitative design, sixteen negotiation transcripts from Season 16 that ended in an agreement were coded into six Toulmin components: claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal. The results show that Data was the most dominant component (47.9%), followed by Claim (18.7%) and Warrant (13.2%), while Backing (8.2%), Qualifier (6.3%), and Rebuttal (5.4%) appeared more selectively depending on context. These frequencies became the basis for arranging the DDNT, a six-template product that provides ready-to-use sentence patterns for each component, ordered from the most to the least dominant. The findings suggest that persuading international investors depends less on English fluency than on the ability to present quantitative evidence and connect it logically to claims, offering a practical communication tool for Indonesian entrepreneurs seeking foreign funding.
References
Akfan, S. S. (2025). English communication challenges among Indonesian entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Communication Studies, 4(1), 39–51.
Azad, D. M. A. K., Nidhya, G. S., Upadhyay, D. M., Dwivedi, D. P. K., Sharma, D. N., & Sazzad, D. M. (2025). Impact of English language communication on attracting global investors in financial sectors. International Journal of Finance Communication, 35(2), 2603–2609.
Băiaș, C.-C. (2025). Analysis and evaluation of Toulmin's model of practical argumentation. Scientific Bulletin of the Politehnica University of Timişoara, Transactions on Modern Languages.
Boulton, T. J., Shohfi, T. D., & Zhu, P. (2018). Angels or sharks? The role of personal characteristics in angel investment decisions. Journal of Small Business Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12409
Bovée, C. L., & Thill, J. V. (2021). Business communication today (15th ed.). Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dlamini, M., & Botha, M. (2023). Entrepreneurial intention and the three stages of entrepreneurial action: A process approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1184390
Ermawati, Y. (2024). Entrepreneurial finance strategies for startup success. Advances in Economics & Financial Studies, 2, 67–75. https://doi.org/10.60079/aefs.v2i2.283
Haltiwanger, J. (2022). Entrepreneurship in the twenty-first century. Small Business Economics, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-021-00542-0
Jetter, M., & Stockley, K. (2023). Gender match and negotiation: Evidence from angel investment on Shark Tank. Empirical Economics, 64(4), 1947–1977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-022-02305-6
Kalvapalle, S. A. I. G., & Phillips, N. (2024). Entrepreneurial pitching: A critical review and integrative framework. Academy of Management Annals, 18(2), 550–599.
Keren, H. (2016). Women in the shark tank: Entrepreneurship and feminism in a neoliberal age. Feminist Media Studies, 75–123.
Lewiński, M., & Mohammed, D. (2013). Argumentation in political deliberation. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 1, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.2.1.00int
Novaes, C. D. (2022). Argument and argumentation. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/argument/
Ratten, V. (2023). Entrepreneurship: Definitions, opportunities, challenges, and future directions. Journal of Organizational Change, 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22217
Sundari, H., & Febriyanti, R. H. (2021). The analysis of Indonesian EFL argumentative writing using Toulmin's model: The structure and struggles from the learners. Journal of English Language Teaching, 2, 67–78.
Supardi, M., & Sayogie, F. (2022). The logical pattern of argument: A case study of national university debating championship. Journal of Language and Communication Studies, 4(1), 65–76.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (Updated ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Turós, M., Kenyeres, A. Z., Balla, G., Gazdag, E., & Szabó, E. (2025). A Toulmin model analysis of student argumentation on artificial intelligence. Journal of Educational Discourse, 1–21.
Yang, R. (2022). An empirical study of claims and qualifiers in ESL students' argumentative writing based on Toulmin model. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00133-w
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Fitri Handayani, Silvia Djonnaidi, Novi Fitria
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
