This study (N = 178) investigates the optimal timing for negotiators to expand the pie by introducing optional issues to the negotiation. I conducted two-person role-play negotiations and...Show moreThis study (N = 178) investigates the optimal timing for negotiators to expand the pie by introducing optional issues to the negotiation. I conducted two-person role-play negotiations and differentiated between adding issues at the beginning, middle and end by manipulating the order on the pay-off schedules. Specifically, I tested if introducing optional issues at the beginning results in a higher collective benefit than introducing them at the end, and if introducing optional issues in the middle leads to the highest collective benefit. Despite the absence of compelling evidence supporting an effect of issue order on collective benefit, the observed patterns in collective benefit suggests the need for further exploration. Additionally, I explore if relationships and first impressions are improved when pairs introduce optional issues in the middle.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
Volgens Van Tol (2016) heeft machtsdistributie invloed op hoe een groepsonderhandeling verloopt. Mensen met veel macht kunnen invloed uitoefenen op de beslissingen tijdens het onderhandelen. De...Show moreVolgens Van Tol (2016) heeft machtsdistributie invloed op hoe een groepsonderhandeling verloopt. Mensen met veel macht kunnen invloed uitoefenen op de beslissingen tijdens het onderhandelen. De resultaten van Van Tol (2016) geven inzicht op welke effecten iemand met totale macht (dictatorschap) zou kunnen hebben op een groepsonderhandeling tussen drie personen. In dit onderzoek worden deze effecten verder vergeleken met groepen waar er sprake is van gelijke macht of een baas (zonder beslisbevoegdheid). Daarmee wordt bedoeld bazen zonder totale macht. Er wordt voorspeld dat groepen met gelijke macht of met een baas gezamenlijk meer punten zullen behalen dan een groep met een dictator. Daarnaast wordt er verwacht dat groepen met een vrouwelijke baas de punten eerlijker zullen verdelen dan groepen met een mannelijke baas. Tot slot wordt er verondersteld dat vrouwen in de rol van dictator gezamenlijk meer punten verzamelen en opzichte van mannelijke dictators. Er is een rollenspel uitgevoerd met groepen van drie personen. Voor dit onderzoek zijn er in totaal n=276 respondenten geworven (n=138 vrouwen, n=138 mannen), verdeeld over n= 92 groepen. De data is online verzameld. De resultaten van het onderzoek ondersteunen de voorspellingen deels. Er is een klein verschil tussen de effecten van groepen met gelijke macht of een baas en groepen met een dictator. Vervolgens blijkt dat geslacht daarbij geen grote rol speelt. Uiteindelijk blijkt dat de groepen met een vrouwelijke dictator minder punten hebben behaald dan groepen met een mannelijke dictator. Concluderend kan er gezegd worden dat geslacht een kleine, maar geen significante invloed heeft op machtsgebruik bij groepsonderhandelingen.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
Are there differences in individual negotiation outcomes between a male leader and a female leader? Does the gender of the leader influence the group outcomes? These questions were investigated...Show moreAre there differences in individual negotiation outcomes between a male leader and a female leader? Does the gender of the leader influence the group outcomes? These questions were investigated through the negotiation task “Aloha Beach Club” which took place during an online video negotiation in groups of three. It has been found that there is indeed a difference in negotiation outcomes between a male and a female leader. When everyone has equal power, male negotiators score more points than female negotiators. These gender effects disappear when women experience power and when the situation is clear and negotiation is allowed. In addition, this study also found that female leaders do not cause to group members achieving equally distributed outcomes.Show less
