Summary This study compares negotiation strategy and outcomes in countries illustrating dignity, face, and honor cultures. Hypotheses predict cultural differences in negotiators' aspirations, use of strategy, and outcomes based on the implications of differences in self‐worth and social structures in dignity, face, and honor cultures. Data were from a face‐to‐face negotiation simulation; participants were intra‐cultural samples from the USA (dignity), China (face), and Qatar (honor). The empirical results provide strong evidence for the predictions concerning the reliance on more competitive negotiation strategies in honor and face cultures relative to dignity cultures in this context of negotiating a new business relationship. The study makes two important theoretical contributions. First, it proposes how and why people in a previously understudied part of the world, that is, the Middle East, use negotiation strategy. Second, it addresses a conundrum in the East Asian literature on negotiation: the theory and research that emphasize the norms of harmony and cooperation in social interaction versus empirical evidence that negotiations in East Asia are highly competitive. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
In this work we develop and validate a model measuring norms that distinguish three types of culture: dignity, face, and honor (Leung & Cohen, 2011). Our motivation is to produce empirical evidence for this new cultural framework and use the framework to explain cultural differences in interdependent social interactions such as negotiation. In two studies, we establish the content validity, construct validity, predictive validity, and measurement invariance of this measurement model. In Study 1, we present the model's three-factor structure and situate the constructs of dignity, face, and honor in a nomological network of cultural constructs. In Study 2, which uses a sample of participants from 26 cultures, we show that the measurement model discriminates among people from the three cultural regions corresponding to the dignity, face, and honor framework. In particular, we report differences between face and honor cultures, which are not distinguished in other cultural frameworks (e.g., Hofstede, 1980). We also show that the measurement model accounts for cultural differences in norms for use of negotiation strategy.
Family business owners and researchers tend to overwhelmingly focus on the top-level structure of firms but ignore the middle-level practice – involving family members in the middle-management team. Compared to top managers at the strategic apex, middle-level managers are mainly responsible for internal operations and control, and the composition of the middle-management team has an immediate and direct impact on the overall workforce efficiency of family firms. Integrating agency theory and organizational justice perspective, we proposed that family involvement in middle management would have a negative impact on the labor productivity of family firms. We further corroborated this effect by identifying three boundary conditions at the individual (i.e., familial CEO), organizational (i.e., firm size), and regional (i.e., labor mobility) levels. Using a sample of 1,284 privately owned family firms in China, we found that family involvement in middle management, measured as the percentage of familial middle-level managers, was negatively associated with labor productivity. Furthermore, this negative relationship existed only when the CEO is a family member rather than a professional manager, when the size of the firm is large rather than small, or when the firm is located in regions with low rather than high labor mobility. These findings contribute to family business literature and provide practical implications for human resource management in family firms.
Summary What affects the way that trust develops in negotiations? In two studies, we used an actor–partner interdependence model to investigate how both negotiators' trust propensity prior to the negotiation and two types of behavior during the negotiation affect negotiators' trust development. Study 1 demonstrated that both focal negotiators' (actors') and their counterparts' (partners') trust propensity were positively associated with negotiators' trust development. Study 2 showed that actors' and partners' trust propensity had an indirect effect on trust development via both actors' and partners' negotiation behaviors. Negotiators' trust propensity positively affected their use of Q&A (questions and answers about interests) and negatively affected their use of S&O (substantiation about positions and single‐issue offers). Actors and partners' negotiation behaviors in turn affected their own and their partners' trust development. Our studies propose and test a model to understand how negotiators' trust propensity and negotiation behaviors affect the development of trust in negotiation. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Teamwork is widely adopted in organisations. Although much evidence indicates that using person‐organisation (P‐O) fit as a selection criterion benefits individual employees, little is known about how this practice influences team functioning. Drawing on the input‐mediator‐outcome model and the research on value congruence, this study built and tested a model that links P‐O fit in recruitment to work teams' performance. Based on data collected from team members, team leaders, human resources managers, and chief executive officers in 96 firms, we found that P‐O fit in recruitment had a positive relationship with team performance and that intrateam trust mediated the relationship between P‐O fit in recruitment and team performance. Further, this mediated relationship existed only when the organisation had a weak, rather than strong, respect‐for‐people culture. This study contributes to the P‐O fit and team literature and has practical implications for human resources practices and team management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.