IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v122y2014i1p89-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maybe It’s Right, Maybe It’s Wrong: Structural and Social Determinants of Deception in Negotiation

Author

Listed:
  • Mara Olekalns
  • Christopher Horan
  • Philip Smith

Abstract

Context shapes negotiators’ actions, including their willingness to act unethically. Focusing on negotiators use of deception, we used a simulated two-party negotiation to test how three contextual variables—regulatory focus, power, and trustworthiness—interacted to shift negotiators’ ethical thresholds. We demonstrated that these three variables interact to either inhibit or activate deception, providing support for an interactionist model of ethical decision-making. Three patterns emerged from our analyses. First, low power inhibited and high power activated deception. Second, promotion-focused negotiators favored sins of omission, whereas prevention-focused negotiators favored sins of commission. Third, low cognition-based trust influenced deception when negotiators experience fit between power and regulatory focus, whereas affect-based trust influenced deception when negotiators experience misfit between these structural context variables. We conclude that regulatory focus primes different moral templates: promotion-focused negotiators’ decision to deceive is determined by moral pragmatism, whereas prevention-focused negotiators’ decision to deceive is determined by opportunism. Because each combination of power and regulatory focus was tied to a specific subcomponent of trust, we further conclude that negotiators engage in motivated information search to determine whether they should deceive their opponents. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:122:y:2014:i:1:p:89-102
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1754-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-013-1754-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-013-1754-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Angela Y. & Aaker, Jennifer L. & Gardner, Wendi L., 2000. "The Pleasures and Pains of Distinct Self-Construals: The Role of Interdependence in Regulatory Focus," Research Papers 1577r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. T. De Bock & P. Van Kenhove, 2010. "Consumer Ethics: The Role of Self-Regulatory Focus," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 10/670, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    3. Brockner, Joel & Higgins, E. Tory, 2001. "Regulatory Focus Theory: Implications for the Study of Emotions at Work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 35-66, September.
    4. Crowe, Ellen & Higgins, E. Tory, 1997. "Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations: Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 117-132, February.
    5. Nicole Ruedy & Maurice Schweitzer, 2010. "In the Moment: The Effect of Mindfulness on Ethical Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 73-87, September.
    6. T. De Bock & P. Van Kenhove & -, 2010. "Consumer Ethics: The Role of Self-Regulatory Focus," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 10/653, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Tine Bock & Patrick Kenhove, 2010. "Consumer Ethics: The Role of Self-Regulatory Focus," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 241-255, December.
    10. Allingham, Michael G. & Sandmo, Agnar, 1972. "Income tax evasion: a theoretical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 323-338, November.
    11. Francesca Gino & Lamar Pierce, 2010. "Lying to Level the Playing Field: Why People May Dishonestly Help or Hurt Others to Create Equity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 89-103, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.

    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. Zou, Lili Wenli & Chan, Ricky Y.K., 2019. "Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 113-127.
    2. Mara Olekalns & Carol Kulik & Lin Chew, 2014. "Sweet Little Lies: Social Context and the Use of Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 13-26, March.
    3. Matthew Valle & K. Michele Kacmar & Suzanne Zivnuska, 2019. "Understanding the Effects of Political Environments on Unethical Behavior in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 173-188, April.
    4. K. Michele Kacmar & Reginald Tucker, 2016. "The Moderating Effect of Supervisor’s Behavioral Integrity on the Relationship between Regulatory Focus and Impression Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 87-98, April.
    5. Gino, Francesca & Margolis, Joshua D., 2011. "Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (Un)ethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 145-156, July.
    6. Ina Garnefeld & Andreas Eggert & Markus Husemann-Kopetzky & Eva Böhm, 2019. "Exploring the link between payment schemes and customer fraud: a mental accounting perspective," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 595-616, July.
    7. Abhijit Patwardhan & Megan Keith & Scott Vitell, 2012. "Religiosity, Attitude Toward Business, and Ethical Beliefs: Hispanic Consumers in the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 61-70, September.
    8. Moon-Yong Kim & Minhee Son, 2021. "What Determines Consumer Attitude toward Green Credit Card Services? A Moderated Mediation Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-18, September.
    9. Dang-Van, Thac & Vo-Thanh, Tan & Vu, Thinh Truong & Wang, Jianming & Nguyen, Ninh, 2023. "Do consumers stick with good-looking broadcasters? The mediating and moderating mechanisms of motivation and emotion," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    10. Mohammad Tariq Al Fozaie, 2022. "Behavior and Socio-Economic Development: An Interdisciplinary Perspective," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 11, November.
    11. Junha Kim & Yunchul Shin & Sujin Lee, 2017. "Built on Stone or Sand: The Stable Powerful Are Unethical, the Unstable Powerful Are Not," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 437-447, August.
    12. Seung Lee, 2013. "Ethics and Expertise: A Social Networks Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 607-621, December.
    13. Wu, Cindy & McMullen, Jeffery S. & Neubert, Mitchell J. & Yi, Xiang, 2008. "The influence of leader regulatory focus on employee creativity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 587-602, September.
    14. Oylum Korkut Altuna & F. Müge Arslan & A. Ercan Gegez & Özge Sýðýrcý, 2016. "Development of a Scale on e-Consumers’ Attitudes towards Ethically Questionable Online Behaviors," Bogazici Journal, Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Bogazici University, Department of Economics, vol. 30(1), pages 99-134.
    15. Higgins, E. Tory & Cornwell, James F.M., 2016. "Securing foundations and advancing frontiers: Prevention and promotion effects on judgment & decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 56-67.
    16. Rafi Chowdhury & Mario Fernando, 2014. "The Relationships of Empathy, Moral Identity and Cynicism with Consumers’ Ethical Beliefs: The Mediating Role of Moral Disengagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(4), pages 677-694, November.
    17. Jacobsen, Catrine & Piovesan, Marco, 2016. "Tax me if you can: An artifactual field experiment on dishonesty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 7-14.
    18. 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.
    19. Oana Buliga & Christian W. Scheiner & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2016. "Business model innovation and organizational resilience: towards an integrated conceptual framework," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(6), pages 647-670, August.
    20. Johnson, Russell E. & King, Danielle D. & (Joanna) Lin, Szu-Han & Scott, Brent A. & Jackson Walker, Erin M. & Wang, Mo, 2017. "Regulatory focus trickle-down: How leader regulatory focus and behavior shape follower regulatory focus," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 29-45.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:122:y:2014:i:1:p:89-102. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.