No abstract

Within the United States, teams outperform solos in negotiation (Thompson, Peterson, & Brodt, 1996). The current research examined whether this team advantage generalizes to negotiators from a collectivist culture (Taiwan). Because different cultures have different social norms, and because the team context may amplify the norms that are salient in a particular culture (Gelfand & Realo, 1999), we predicted that the effect of teams on negotiation would differ across cultures. Specifically, we predicted that since harmony norms predominate in collectivist cultures like Taiwan, the team context would amplify a concern with harmony, leading Taiwanese teams to negotiate especially suboptimal outcomes. In support, 2 studies showed that Taiwanese teams negotiated less-optimal outcomes than Taiwanese solos. We also used a moderated-mediation analysis to investigate the mechanism (Hayes, 2012), documenting that the interactive effect of culture and context on outcomes was mediated by harmony norms. By showing that the same situational conditions (team negotiations) can have divergent effects on negotiation outcomes across cultures, our results point toward a nuanced, sociocontextual view that moves beyond the culture-as-main-effect approach to studying culture and negotiations.

Gender‐related categorization is a key feature of the literature on gender in negotiation. While previous literature focused on context‐free traits such as warmth and competence, we examine how people categorize specific negotiation goals and behaviors as masculine and feminine across the United States and China in different negotiation contexts, illustrating the role of cultural and situational contexts in gender‐related categorization. Two studies found that while American participants categorized competitive goals and behaviors as masculine and cooperative ones as feminine across business‐to‐consumer (B2C) and business‐to‐business (B2B) negotiation contexts, Chinese participants' patterns depended on the negotiation context. In B2C contexts, Chinese participants categorized competitive goals and behaviors as feminine and cooperative ones as masculine; in B2B contexts, they made further distinctions, categorizing competitive goals and behaviors that are socially inappropriate as feminine, but competitive ones that are socially appropriate, and cooperative goals and behaviors, as masculine. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract