This study examined how different levels of power influence outcomes in group negotiations. Hereby, triads of friends (n=81) or strangers (n=74) either had a powerholder with almighty decisional...Show moreThis study examined how different levels of power influence outcomes in group negotiations. Hereby, triads of friends (n=81) or strangers (n=74) either had a powerholder with almighty decisional power, a merely appointed leader, or no leader. It was expected that different motivational orientations affect whether a powerholder is beneficial or harmful. Results from the three-person “Aloha Beach Club” group negotiation task confirmed this prediction as cooperative groups reached more integrative agreements than individualistic groups. Although it was expected that power would animate cooperative leaders to organize the negotiation, no such structuring behaviour was found. Moreover, opposite than predicted, individualistic powerholders attained higher scores in groups of friends than in groups of strangers. Overall, results showed that it is irrelevant whether leaders have almighty power or are merely appointed – in both cooperative and individualistic groups they attained similar outcomes.Show less
How does the social motivation and power dispersion of a team interact with its leaders´ power level to shape negotiation outcomes and processes? To answer this question, we had 155 threeperson...Show moreHow does the social motivation and power dispersion of a team interact with its leaders´ power level to shape negotiation outcomes and processes? To answer this question, we had 155 threeperson-groups perform a multi-party, multi-issue negotiation exercise. Due to a higher incidence of productive behaviour, making integrative behaviour more likely, prosocially motivated teams were expected to outperform individualistic teams in terms of joint outcomes. An asymmetric power dispersion was hypothesised to enhance this effect due to the either harmful or helpful effects power could have, depending on its use. Team leaders` differing power levels were expected to only have a (damaging) effect on individualistic teams´ outcomes. Trends in the data we obtained generally pointed in the predicted direction, but most effects failed to reach significance due to a lacking statistical power. Individualistic bosses´ teams slightly outperformed ones with a more powerful dictator, which went against our expectations.Show less
What effect do female leaders have on group negotiation outcomes, and do these effects differ from male leaders? Female leaders have been predicted to achieve higher aggregate outcomes of group...Show moreWhat effect do female leaders have on group negotiation outcomes, and do these effects differ from male leaders? Female leaders have been predicted to achieve higher aggregate outcomes of group bargaining than male leaders due to their cooperative and democratic leadership style. It was investigated whether this difference is greater in a negotiating situation in which the leader has limited power and no full power. Finally, the current study examined whether satisfaction with female leaders is higher than satisfaction with male leaders. Results from a role-playing game in which three people had to negotiate in an “Aloha Beach Club” exercise do not support these predictions. The effects of female and male leaders on the outcomes of group negotiations did not differ and people were not more satisfied with female leaders than male leadersShow less
What is the effect of power of leaders on group negotiations? And is there a difference between male and female leaders? Divergent levels of power of the leader, the gender of the leader, or a...Show moreWhat is the effect of power of leaders on group negotiations? And is there a difference between male and female leaders? Divergent levels of power of the leader, the gender of the leader, or a combination of both, had been predicted to affect negotiation outcomes. The ‘Aloha Beach Club’ negotiation task was used in this study, where participants had to negotiate six topics in groups of three. A 3 (Power of the leader: Dictator vs. Boss vs. Equal power) x 2 (Gender of the leader: Male vs. Female) design was conducted. Results showed that men scored higher individual outcomes than women if everyone in their group had the same level of power. Female leaders who were given dictator power scored higher individual outcomes than female leaders who had the same level of power as the rest of their group. Results did not support other predictions about the effect of power or gender of leaders on individual or group negotiation outcomesShow less
Wat is de invloed van macht op de geslachten in driepersoons groepsonderhandelingen? Kijkend naar stereotypes hebben mannen een voordeel met onderhandelingen ten opzichte van vrouwen. Eigenschappen...Show moreWat is de invloed van macht op de geslachten in driepersoons groepsonderhandelingen? Kijkend naar stereotypes hebben mannen een voordeel met onderhandelingen ten opzichte van vrouwen. Eigenschappen die nodig zijn voor een goede onderhandeling - die we tevens eerder toeschrijven aan mannen dan aan vrouwen - zijn dominantie en assertiviteit. De verwachting was dat vrouwen die macht toegewezen kregen hogere individuele uitkomsten hebben dan vrouwen die geen macht toegewezen kregen. Bovendien zouden groepen met mannen in de meerderheid lagere gezamenlijke groepsuitkomsten hebben, omdat mannen competitiever zijn. Vrouwen zijn juist coöperatief en groepen met vrouwen in de meerderheid zullen daarom hogere groepsuitkomsten behalen. Deze voorspellingen zijn onderzocht met een rollenspel experiment voor driepersoons onderhandelingen genaamd “Aloha Beach Club”, deze onderhandelingstaak werd uitgevoerd via videobellen. De resultaten vertellen ons dat er geen verschil tussen de geslachten is betreffende de groepsuitkomsten. Wel is het zo dat vrouwen zonder toegewezen macht lagere individuele uitkomsten halen dan mannen, maar zodra ze wel macht krijgen doen ze niet meer onder voor mannen. Een verklaring voor dit resultaat kan zijn dat door het videobellen de verschillen tussen de geslachten minder aanwezig en herkenbaar waren, waardoor er niet naar stereotypes gehandeld werd. What is the influence of power on the genders in three-person group negotiations? Looking at the stereotypes, men tend to have an advantage of women. Qualities that are needed for negotiations – that we assign to men more often than to women – are dominance and assertiveness. The expectation was that women that got assigned to a position where they are powerful, would get higher individual outcomes in negotiations than women who did not get assign to a position of power. Also, groups with a majority of men would get lower group outcomes than groups with a majority of women, because men are more competitive. Women are cooperative, and groups with a majority of women will get higher group outcomes. The expectations were tested in the three-person groups negotiation task “Aloha Beach Club”, the negotiation task was done by video calling. The results show that there is no difference between the genders in joint group outcomes. But they did show that women without any power get lower individual scores than men, but as soon as they are assigned to a position of power, they don’t get any fewer individual points than men. An explanation for this result could be that because of the video calling, the differences in gender were less present and recognizable, causing that stereotypes were not acted upon.Show less
