Past research has suggested that work-life balance plays an important role in maintaining a healthy work environment and enhanced productivity, as well as improved mental and physical health (Zheng...Show morePast research has suggested that work-life balance plays an important role in maintaining a healthy work environment and enhanced productivity, as well as improved mental and physical health (Zheng et al., 2015). Work-life balance crafting intentions among entrepreneurs were investigated, given that a critical aspect behind maintaining a healthy work-life balance is one’s motivation to actually craft it. Two variables that may predict entrepreneurs’ intentions to craft and preserve a healthy work-life balance, growth intentions and workaholism, were thus examined in a cross-sectional study employing actual entrepreneurs (N = 172). The results of this study demonstrated that growth intentions were positively and significantly predictive of work-life balance, whereas workaholism was negatively and significantly predictive of work-life balance. The findings of this research provided supporting evidence that workaholism could lead to lower intentions of entrepreneurs to maintain a work-life balance, whereas growth intentions seem to predict a higher engagement in proactive behaviors aimed to maintain a work-life balance.Show less
This study examined how social motives and power-differences influence the outcome of a dyadic negotiation task. It was predicted that both social motives and power-differences influence the extent...Show moreThis study examined how social motives and power-differences influence the outcome of a dyadic negotiation task. It was predicted that both social motives and power-differences influence the extent to which extra value is added to the negotiation (i.e. ‘expanding the pie’). In the “Sandwich Heaven” negotiation task (N = 192), participants negotiated according to the “Mandatory-Optional Issue Paradigm”. Participants had to agree on the five mandatory issues and had the option to include three additional issues. Dyads were randomly assigned to one of four conditions of the two (power: equal versus difference) x 2 (social motive: prosocial versus proself) design. The manipulations of power and social motive were operationalized through the instructions. Results showed that both social motive, and the combination of social motive and power, did not have a significant effect on the negotiated outcome. Prosocial oriented people were found to add more additional issues to the deal than proself oriented people.Show less
Nowadays, the focus of negotiation is increasingly on cooperative bargaining and achieving a win-win situation. This study uses a new research paradigm that examines adding subjects to the...Show moreNowadays, the focus of negotiation is increasingly on cooperative bargaining and achieving a win-win situation. This study uses a new research paradigm that examines adding subjects to the negotiation, also known as increasing the size of the pie. This research was conducted in a social setting where alcohol consumption was a factor. The purpose of this study is to find out whether adding topics to the negotiation and alcohol consumption leads to a better negotiation process and better outcomes for both parties. To this end, 190 participants participated in face-to-face conventional role-play negotiations in pairs and completed a questionnaire afterwards. It was found that the participant who could originally gain more points from the negotiation had less resistance to yielding when the topics were added at the beginning of the negotiation. The participant who was originally able to get fewer points out of the negotiation acted more simultaneously when the topics were added at the beginning of the negotiation. In addition, a cautious trend was found of more concern for other when an average amount of alcohol was consumed by the participant who could achieve fewer points and more concern for other by the participant who could achieve more points when the items were added at the beginning of the negotiation.Show less
How are effects of social motive affected by asymmetric power dispersion in a three-person negotiation, and does this effect differ between groups of friends and strangers? It was hypothesized that...Show moreHow are effects of social motive affected by asymmetric power dispersion in a three-person negotiation, and does this effect differ between groups of friends and strangers? It was hypothesized that pro-social groups would reach the highest joint outcomes with a leader operating under an unanimity decision rule, followed by groups with a dictator, followed groups without a boss. A pro-self group with a dictator was thought to reach the lowest joint outcomes, followed by one with a leader, followed one without a boss. It was furthermore hypothesized that the effects of a pro-self motive would be stronger in a group of strangers, and the effects of a pro-social motive were thought to be stronger in a group of friends. Results of the three-person Aloha Beach Club negotiation game supported only the hypotheses about the amplifying effect of power differences on social motive.Show less
In recent decades, there has been an increased scholarly interest in negotiation, both on distributive and integrative bargaining. The latter is characterized by the expansion of the resource pool...Show moreIn recent decades, there has been an increased scholarly interest in negotiation, both on distributive and integrative bargaining. The latter is characterized by the expansion of the resource pool or pie, in a way that both negotiators benefit from the outcome. The resource pool is only expanded when negotiators manage to create value by finding alternative solutions to issues that increase the joint gain of both parties. In this study, we used a two-person roleplay negotiation conducted face-to-face in an informal setting (N = 95) to explore the influence of alcohol and order of presented issues on joint gain. We find no systematic differences within the alcohol conditions and order conditions on joint gain. While some of the possible patterns we find are not conclusive yet, further research could yield interesting results.Show less
Group negotiations are an important aspect of social interactions and can be strongly influenced by familiarity, social motive and power differences between involved parties. A pro-social motive...Show moreGroup negotiations are an important aspect of social interactions and can be strongly influenced by familiarity, social motive and power differences between involved parties. A pro-social motive was associated with more concern for the needs of others. Powerful individuals in the asymmetric power conditions were expected to have more influence on the outcome. Friends were expected to have more integrative results compared with strangers. Additionally, groups that trusted each other were expected to reach higher joint outcomes by openly sharing information. The results of a three-person online negotiation exercise supported a crucial role of trust. Groups that trust each other reached higher joint outcomes for all experimental conditions. The integrative potential of the outcome was not influenced by the groups consisting of friends or strangers. Pro-social motive groups reached more integrative outcome for groups of friends and stranger alike. Furthermore, participants that were given more power had more influence on the outcome of the negotiation. Contradicting our expectations, strangers showed more concern for a fair and considerate negotiation process.Show less
