IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/harjfk/rwp05-051.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Constraints and Triggers: Situational Mechanics of Gender in Negotiation

Author

Listed:
  • Bowles, Hannah Riley

    (Harvard U)

  • Babcock, Linda

    (Carnegie Mellon U)

  • McGinn, Kathleen L.

    (Harvard U)

Abstract

Authors propose two categories of situational moderators of gender in negotiation: situational ambiguity and gender triggers. Reducing the degree of situational ambiguity constrains the influence of gender on negotiation. Gender triggers prompt divergent behavioral responses as a function of gender. Field and lab studies (1 and 2) demonstrate that decreased ambiguity in the economic structure of a negotiation (structural ambiguity) reduces gender effects on negotiation performance. Study 3 shows representation role (negotiating for self or other) functions as a gender trigger by producing a greater effect on female than male negotiation performance. Study 4 shows decreased structural ambiguity constrains gender effects of representation role, suggesting situational ambiguity and gender triggers work in interaction to moderate gender effects on negotiation performance. (This paper is a revision of RWP02-037.)

Suggested Citation

  • Bowles, Hannah Riley & Babcock, Linda & McGinn, Kathleen L., 2005. "Constraints and Triggers: Situational Mechanics of Gender in Negotiation," Working Paper Series rwp05-051, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:rwp05-051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/citation.aspx?PubId=3130&type=WPN
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kray, Laura J. & Galinsky, Adam D. & Thompson, Leigh, 2002. "Reversing the Gender Gap in Negotiations: An Exploration of Stereotype Regeneration," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 386-410, March.
    2. White, Sally Blount & Neale, Margaret A., 1994. "The Role of Negotiator Aspirations and Settlement Expectancies in Bargaining Outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 303-317, February.
    3. Croson, Rachel & Mnookin, Robert H, 1997. "Does Disputing through Agents Enhance Cooperation? Experimental Evidence," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 331-345, June.
    4. Bazerman, Max H. & Neale, Margaret A. & Valley, Kathleen L. & Zajac, Edward J. & Kim, Yong Min, 1992. "The effect of agents and mediators on negotiation outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 55-73, October.
    5. Valley, Kathleen L. & White, Sally Blount & Neale, Margaret A. & Bazerman, Max H., 1992. "Agents as information brokers: The effects of information disclosure on negotiated outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 220-236, March.
    6. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    7. Walters, Amy E. & Stuhlmacher, Alice F. & Meyer, Lia L., 1998. "Gender and Negotiator Competitiveness: A Meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 1-29, October.
    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. 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.
    2. Inés P. Murillo & Hipólito Simón, 2014. "La Gran Recesión y el diferencial salarial por género en España," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 39-76, March.
    3. Dean Gatzlaff & Peng Liu, 2013. "List Price Information in the Negotiation of Commercial Real Estate Transactions: Is Silence Golden?," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 760-786, November.
    4. Corinne Bendersky & Kathleen L. McGinn, 2010. "Perspective---Open to Negotiation: Phenomenological Assumptions and Knowledge Dissemination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 781-797, June.
    5. Vairam Arunachalam & William Dilla & Marjorie Shelley & Chris Chan, 1998. "Market Alternatives, Third Party Intervention, and Third Party Informedness in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 81-107, March.
    6. Huang, Jennie & Low, Corinne, 2022. "The myth of the male negotiator: Gender’s effect on negotiation strategies and outcomes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 517-532.
    7. Najib A. Mozahem & Moniat El Noufous K. El Masri & Nazhat M. Najm & Samah S. Saleh, 2021. "How Gender Differences in Entitlement and Apprehension Manifest Themselves in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 587-610, June.
    8. Xiaohua Zeng & Srabana Dasgupta & Charles Weinberg, 2012. "How Good Are You at Getting a Lower Price? A Field Study of the US Automobile Market," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 255-274, June.
    9. Patricia Elgoibar & Elio Shijaku, 2022. "Bringing the Social Back into Sustainability: Why Integrative Negotiation Matters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-12, May.
    10. Bowles, Hannah Riley, 2012. "Psychological Perspectives on Gender in Negotiation," Working Paper Series rwp12-046, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    11. Julia Bogacki & Peter Letmathe, 2021. "Representatives of future generations as promoters of sustainability in corporate decision processes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 237-251, January.
    12. Bowles, Hannah Riley & Babcock, Linda & Lai, Lei, 2005. "It Depends Who Is Asking and Who You Ask: Social Incentives for Sex Differences in the Propensity to Initiate Negotiation," Working Paper Series rwp05-045, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Bowles, Hannah Riley & Babcock, Linda & Lai, Lei, 2007. "Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: Sometimes it does hurt to ask," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 84-103, May.
    14. Bowles, Hannah Riley & Flynn, Francis J., 2007. "Getting Past No: Gender and the Propensity to Persist in Negotiation," Working Paper Series rwp07-063, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Bertrand, Marianne, 2011. "New Perspectives on Gender," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 17, pages 1543-1590, Elsevier.
    16. Michael Dinkel, 2012. "Human behaviour - an underappreciated factor in real estate transaction analyses," ERES eres2012_108, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    17. Bowles, Hannah Riley, 2012. "Psychological Perspectives on Gender in Negotiation," Scholarly Articles 9830358, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    18. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    19. Darima Fotheringham & Michael A. Wiles, 2023. "The effect of implementing chatbot customer service on stock returns: an event study analysis," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 802-822, July.
    20. Song, Wei-Ling & Uzmanoglu, Cihan, 2016. "TARP announcement, bank health, and borrowers’ credit risk," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 22-32.

    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:ecl:harjfk:rwp05-051. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ksharus.html .

    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.