Negotiation

Bazerman, Max H.; Curhan, Jared R.; Moore, Don A.; Valley, Kathleen L.

doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.279

Cited by 650 publications

(397 citation statements)

References 186 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

381

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We cooperate in groups that extend beyond the boundaries of genetic kinship even when reputational gains are unlikely. Such cooperative tendencies are at least partly driven by deeply ingrained moral sentiments reflected in a genuine concern for the well-being of others (1) and allow people to build meaningful relationships (2,3), develop trust (4, 5), achieve mutually beneficial outcomes (6)(7)(8), and strengthen bonds with in-group members (9,10). Furthermore, reciprocating others' cooperative acts is essential for establishing long-term cooperation (11)(12)(13).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The collaborative roots of corruption

Weisel

Shalvi

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

243

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cooperation is essential for completing tasks that individuals cannot accomplish alone. Whereas the benefits of cooperation are clear, little is known about its possible negative aspects. Introducing a novel sequential dyadic die-rolling paradigm, we show that collaborative settings provide fertile ground for the emergence of corruption. In the main experimental treatment the outcomes of the two players are perfectly aligned. Player A privately rolls a die, reports the result to player B, who then privately rolls and reports the result as well. Both players are paid the value of the reports if, and only if, they are identical (e.g., if both report 6, each earns €6). Because rolls are truly private, players can inflate their profit by misreporting the actual outcomes. Indeed, the proportion of reported doubles was 489% higher than the expected proportion assuming honesty, 48% higher than when individuals rolled and reported alone, and 96% higher than when lies only benefited the other player. Breaking the alignment in payoffs between player A and player B reduced the extent of brazen lying. Despite player B's central role in determining whether a double was reported, modifying the incentive structure of either player A or player B had nearly identical effects on the frequency of reported doubles. Our results highlight the role of collaboration-particularly on equal terms-in shaping corruption. These findings fit a functional perspective on morality. When facing opposing moral sentiments-to be honest vs. to join forces in collaboration-people often opt for engaging in corrupt collaboration.cooperation | corruption | decision making | behavioral ethics |

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The collaborative roots of corruption

Weisel

Shalvi

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

243

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From a practical and pragmatic perspective integration is only interesting if it influences outcomes. Of course, we expect that searching for information about facts and interests -and motivated behavior to use this information to create novel solution and mutual gain -will contribute to high quality outcomes (e.g., Bazerman, Curhan, Moore, & Valley, 2000;Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993;Thompson, 1998). We believe this will hold for various Conflict Management 15 aspects of outcomes such as for decision quality, satisfaction, fairness, and trust.…”

Section: Study 4 and Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the integrative approach to conflict management

Rognes

Schei²

2010

Journal of Managerial Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to examine the integrative approach to conflicts.Integration is an active search for information about facts and interests -motivated by a willingness to find mutually satisfactory agreements -and is usually necessary for creating high quality settlements in conflicts. Thus, in order to understand how to avoid win-lose outcomes, or impasses, we need knowledge about factors that relate to, and promote, integration. We here use five data-sets to explore factors relating to individuals' inclination to integrate. Our results show that (a) degree of integration varies, that (b) the variation can be explained by individual differences, by situational differences, and to some degree by group differences, and that (c) integration predicts high quality outcomes in conflicts.KEY WORDS: Conflict Management, Negotiation, Integrative style, Integrative behavior. Conflict Management 3Handling conflicts constructively are one of the greatest challenges in the modern world. Despite maturing societies, growth in scientific knowledge, and a more educated population, we still face damaging conflicts. Conflicts escalate, we reach impasses, and we hurt each other in the conflict process. Individuals get psychological problems, interpersonal relations break down, groups fight, and nations and societies are at war. Notwithstanding all this, conflict management researchers still insist that many -and even most -conflicts have an integrative potential. That is, parties can get a mutual satisfactory agreement if they persistently search for it. Therefore, many of the harmful conflicts that we face today have the potential of being handled constructively.In order to handle conflicts constructively, the individuals involved must -according to conflict research (e.g., Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993) -have an integrative approach. That is, they must search for information about facts and interests, and creatively use that information to generate mutually satisfactory agreements. Thus, integration is a key concept in the conflict management literature. It is used in relation to various aspects of the conflict management process -e.g., integrative potential, integrative outcome, integrative process and integrative intention/style and behavior -and is largely synonymous with the term problem solving in conflict research, and with the "win-win" notion in the negotiation literature. At a broad level, integration concerns the creation of values over and above what isachieved if the parties only divide the values that seem obviously available at the outset of a conflict management process. Value creation is about identifying areas of joint gain and to create settlements based on this. Values can, for example, be created by trading across issues where the parties have different priorities, rather than by compromising on one single issue at a time. In order to do so the parties must somehow share information about (differential) priorities, and propose solutions that take both parties interests into account. For exam...

show abstract

“…Keywords: agreeableness, extraversion, personality similarity, emotional display, negotiation PERSONALITY SIMILARITY IN NEGOTIATIONS 3 Scholars for many years characterized personality as having little to no impact on negotiation behavior and outcomes (e.g., Bazerman, Curhan, Moore, & Valley, 2000;Rubin & Brown, 1975;Thompson, 1990). More recently, however, researchers found evidence for a different story and have begun specifying a range of new and interesting ways that personality impacts negotiations (e.g., Barry & Friedman, 1998;Barry, Fulmer, & Van Kleef, 2004;DeRue, Conlon, Moon, & Willaby, 2009;Dimotakis, Conlon, & Ilies, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes.

Wilson¹,

DeRue²,

Matta³

et al. 2016

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We build on the small but growing literature documenting personality influences on negotiation by examining how the joint disposition of both negotiators with respect to the interpersonal traits of agreeableness and extraversion influences important negotiation processes and outcomes. Building on similarity-attraction theory, we articulate and demonstrate how being similarly high or similarly low on agreeableness and extraversion leads dyad members to express more positive emotional displays during negotiation. Moreover, because of increased positive emotional displays, we show that dyads with such compositions also tend to reach agreements faster, perceive less relationship conflict, and have more positive impressions of their negotiation partner. Interestingly, these results hold regardless of whether negotiating dyads are similar in normatively positive (i.e., similarly agreeable and similarly extraverted) or normatively negative (i.e., similarly disagreeable and similarly introverted) ways. Overall, these findings demonstrate the importance of considering the dyad's personality configuration when attempting to understand the affective experience as well as the downstream outcomes of a negotiation. ABSTRACTWe build on the small but growing literature documenting personality influences on negotiation by examining how the joint disposition of both negotiators with respect to the interpersonal traits of agreeableness and extraversion influences important negotiation processes and outcomes.Building on similarity-attraction theory, we articulate and demonstrate how being similarly high or similarly low on agreeableness and extraversion leads dyad members to express more positive emotional displays during negotiation. Moreover, due to increased positive emotional displays, we show that dyads with such compositions also tend to reach agreements faster, perceive less relationship conflict, and have more positive impressions of their negotiation partner.Interestingly, these results hold regardless of whether negotiating dyads are similar in normatively positive (i.e., similarly agreeable and similarly extraverted) or normatively negative (i.e., similarly disagreeable and similarly introverted) ways. Overall, these findings demonstrate the importance of considering the dyad's personality configuration when attempting to understand the affective experience as well as the downstream outcomes of a negotiation.Keywords: agreeableness, extraversion, personality similarity, emotional display, negotiation PERSONALITY SIMILARITY IN NEGOTIATIONS 3 Scholars for many years characterized personality as having little to no impact on negotiation behavior and outcomes (e.g., Bazerman, Curhan, Moore, & Valley, 2000;Rubin & Brown, 1975;Thompson, 1990). More recently, however, researchers found evidence for a different story and have begun specifying a range of new and interesting ways that personality impacts negotiations (e.g., Barry & Friedman, 1998;Barry, Fulmer, & Van Kleef, 2004;DeRue, Conlon, Moon, & Willaby, 2009;Dimot...

show abstract

Negotiation

Cited by 650 publications

References 186 publications

The collaborative roots of corruption

The collaborative roots of corruption

Understanding the integrative approach to conflict management

Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About