IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jscmgt/v59y2023i2p33-61.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In the eye of the beholder: A configurational exploration of perceived deceptive supplier behavior in negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Katja Woelfl
  • Lutz Kaufmann
  • Craig R. Carter

Abstract

Deceptive behavior in negotiations has been found to be widespread and to have harmful consequences. This study shifts the current research direction on deceptive negotiation behavior by adopting a target's perspective on deception and by using a configurational theorizing approach. Prior studies in supply chain management (SCM) and in other disciplines have studied deceptive negotiation behavior—as one specific form of opportunism—based on correlational approaches. In doing so, they have focused almost exclusively on the actor's (i.e., deceiver's) perspective—for example, investigating actors' motivations for using deception. As a result, a profound understanding of deceptive negotiation behavior from a target's perspective is lacking. In three studies, this research investigates what factors, on both the firm and individual levels, combine to lead purchasing managers (i.e., targets) to perceive supplier deception. The configurational analysis uncovers considerably more combinations of firm‐level and individual‐level factors that lead to perceptions of high supplier deception than combinations that lead to perceptions of low supplier deception. Thus, the contribution is twofold: First, the studies shift the perspective from the deception source to the deception target. Second, they uncover the causally complex nature of perceived deception in negotiations. Managerial implications include that purchasing managers, in their efforts to detect supplier deception, should move beyond paying attention to isolated factors, such as body language, and instead should focus on different combinations of power balances, negotiation stakes, and negotiator proficiencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Katja Woelfl & Lutz Kaufmann & Craig R. Carter, 2023. "In the eye of the beholder: A configurational exploration of perceived deceptive supplier behavior in negotiations," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 59(2), pages 33-61, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jscmgt:v:59:y:2023:i:2:p:33-61
    DOI: 10.1111/jscm.12298
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12298
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jscm.12298?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louviere, Jordan & Lings, Ian & Islam, Towhidul & Gudergan, Siegfried & Flynn, Terry, 2013. "An introduction to the application of (case 1) best–worst scaling in marketing research," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 292-303.
    2. Lutz Kaufmann & Joerg Rottenburger & Craig R. Carter & Christian Schlereth, 2018. "Bluffs, Lies, and Consequences: A Reconceptualization of Bluffing in Buyer–Supplier Negotiations," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 54(2), pages 49-70, April.
    3. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical decision making," Post-Print hal-00814614, HAL.
    4. Joseph P. Gaspar & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2021. "Confident and Cunning: Negotiator Self-Efficacy Promotes Deception in Negotiations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 139-155, June.
    5. Felix Reimann & Tobias Kosmol & Lutz Kaufmann, 2017. "Responses to Supplier-Induced Disruptions: A Fuzzy-Set Analysis," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 53(4), pages 37-66, October.
    6. Verónica H. Villena & Christopher W. Craighead, 2017. "On the Same Page? How Asymmetric Buyer–Supplier Relationships Affect Opportunism and Performance," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(3), pages 491-508, March.
    7. Kevin Tasa & Chris M. Bell, 2017. "Effects of Implicit Negotiation Beliefs and Moral Disengagement on Negotiator Attitudes and Deceptive Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 169-183, April.
    8. Koning, Lukas & Steinel, Wolfgang & Beest, Ilja van & Dijk, Eric van, 2011. "Power and deception in ultimatum bargaining," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 35-42, May.
    9. Mara Olekalns & Philip Smith, 2007. "Loose with the Truth: Predicting Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 225-238, December.
    10. Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2016. "Mad and misleading: Incidental anger promotes deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 207-217.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:3:p:199-206 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Matthew Grennan, 2014. "Bargaining Ability and Competitive Advantage: Empirical Evidence from Medical Devices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 3011-3025, December.
    13. David J. Ketchen & Lutz Kaufmann & Craig R. Carter, 2022. "Configurational approaches to theory development in supply chain management: Leveraging underexplored opportunities," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(3), pages 71-88, July.
    14. Stephanie Eckerd & Sean Handley & Fabrice Lumineau, 2022. "Trust violations in buyer–supplier relationships: Spillovers and the contingent role of governance structures," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(3), pages 47-70, July.
    15. Mara Olekalns & Philip Smith, 2009. "Mutually Dependent: Power, Trust, Affect and the Use of Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 347-365, March.
    16. Sako, Mari & Helper, Susan, 1998. "Determinants of trust in supplier relations: Evidence from the automotive industry in Japan and the United States," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 387-417, March.
    17. Donal Crilly, 2011. "Predicting stakeholder orientation in the multinational enterprise: A mid-range theory," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 42(5), pages 694-717, June.
    18. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical decision making," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00814614, HAL.
    19. Stav Fainshmidt & Michael A Witt & Ruth V Aguilera & Alain Verbeke, 2020. "The contributions of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(4), pages 455-466, June.
    20. Croson, Rachel & Boles, Terry & Murnighan, J. Keith, 2003. "Cheap talk in bargaining experiments: lying and threats in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 143-159, June.
    21. Thomas Mellewigt & Glenn Hoetker & Martina Lütkewitte, 2018. "Avoiding High Opportunism Is Easy, Achieving Low Opportunism Is Not: A QCA Study on Curbing Opportunism in Buyer–Supplier Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1208-1208, December.
    22. Mara Olekalns & Christopher Horan & Philip Smith, 2014. "Maybe It’s Right, Maybe It’s Wrong: Structural and Social Determinants of Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 89-102, June.
    23. Fabrice Lumineau & Nuno Oliveira, 2020. "Reinvigorating the Study of Opportunism in Supply Chain Management," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 56(1), pages 73-87, January.
    24. Joseph P. Gaspar & Redona Methasani & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2022. "Emotional Intelligence and Deception: A Theoretical Model and Propositions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 567-584, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Minson, Julia A. & VanEpps, Eric M. & Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2018. "Eliciting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth: The effect of question phrasing on deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 76-93.
    2. David J. Ketchen & Lutz Kaufmann & Craig R. Carter, 2022. "Configurational approaches to theory development in supply chain management: Leveraging underexplored opportunities," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(3), pages 71-88, July.
    3. Joseph P. Gaspar & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2021. "Confident and Cunning: Negotiator Self-Efficacy Promotes Deception in Negotiations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 139-155, June.
    4. Joseph P. Gaspar & Redona Methasani & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2022. "Emotional Intelligence and Deception: A Theoretical Model and Propositions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 567-584, May.
    5. SimanTov-Nachlieli, Ilanit & Har-Vardi, Liron & Moran, Simone, 2020. "When negotiators with honest reputations are less (and more) likely to be deceived," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 68-84.
    6. Lutz Kaufmann & Moritz Schreiner & Felix Reimann, 2023. "Narratives in supplier negotiations—The interplay of narrative design elements, structural power, and outcomes," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 59(1), pages 66-94, January.
    7. Verónica H. Villena & Thomas Y. Choi & Elena Revilla, 2021. "Mitigating Mechanisms for the Dark Side of Collaborative Buyer–Supplier Relationships: A Mixed‐Method Study," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 57(4), pages 86-116, October.
    8. Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2016. "Mad and misleading: Incidental anger promotes deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 207-217.
    9. Klassen, Robert D. & Shafiq, Asad & Fraser Johnson, P., 2023. "Opportunism in supply chains: Dynamically building governance mechanisms to address sustainability-related challenges," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    10. Guo, Wenqian & Lu, Wenxue & Gao, Xinran, 2022. "Exploring configurations of negotiating behaviors in business negotiations: A qualitative comparative analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 435-448.
    11. Leib, Margarita & Schweitzer, Maurice, 2020. "Peer Behavior Profoundly Influences Dishonesty: Will Individuals Seek-out Information about Peers’ Dishonesty?," OSF Preprints 3pwcg, Center for Open Science.
    12. Cannavale, Chiara & Esempio, Anna & Ferretti, Marco, 2021. "Up- and down- alliances: A systematic literature review," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5).
    13. Richter, Nicole Franziska & Hauff, Sven, 2022. "Necessary conditions in international business research–Advancing the field with a new perspective on causality and data analysis," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(5).
    14. Bertrand, Olivier & Betschinger, Marie-Ann & Brea-Solís, Humberto, 2022. "Export barriers for SMEs in emerging countries: A configurational approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 412-423.
    15. To, Christopher & Leslie, Lisa M. & Torelli, Carlos J. & Stoner, Jennifer L., 2020. "Culture and social hierarchy: Collectivism as a driver of the relationship between power and status," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 159-176.
    16. Kray, Laura J. & Kennedy, Jessica A. & Van Zant, Alex B., 2014. "Not competent enough to know the difference? Gender stereotypes about women’s ease of being misled predict negotiator deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 61-72.
    17. Federica Nieri & Luciano Ciravegna & Ruth V. Aguilera & Elisa Giuliani, 2019. "Larger, more internationalized, better behaved? A configurational study of em erging market multinational enterprises' involvement in corporate wrongdoing," Discussion Papers 2019/255, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Bhukya, Ramulu & Paul, Justin, 2023. "Social influence research in consumer behavior: What we learned and what we need to learn? – A hybrid systematic literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    19. Nohe, Christoph & Hüffmeier, Joachim & Bürkner, Paul & Mazei, Jens & Sondern, Dominik & Runte, Antonia & Sieber, Franziska & Hertel, Guido, 2022. "Unethical choice in negotiations: A meta-analysis on gender differences and their moderators," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Paulina Roszkowska & Domènec Melé, 2021. "Organizational Factors in the Individual Ethical Behaviour. The Notion of the “Organizational Moral Structure”," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 187-209, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jscmgt:v:59:y:2023:i:2:p:33-61. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1523-2409 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.