IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v40y1996i4p678-698.html

Intergroup Negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey T. Polzer

    (Graduate School of Business, University of Texas at Austin)

Abstract

In this study, the performance of individual and team negotiators is compared. From an intergroup relations perspective, teams may be impeded by their competitive orientation and low levels of cooperation and trust. However, from a cognitive perspective, advantages should accrue to teams because more people are present to generate additional ideas, bring a greater number of perspectives to the problem, and perform strategically important roles during the negotiation. The relative effects of these opposing forces were tested by comparing the perceptions and outcomes of parties in intergroup, interindividual, and mixed (team vs. individual) negotiations in a laboratory experiment. Results indicate that the presence of teams increased competitiveness and decreased cooperativeness and trust between negotiating parties. In mixed negotiations, teams outperformed individual opponents and were perceived as having more power and more ideas for a solution. Teams also affected integrative outcomes when negotiators' level of training was considered, such that the presence of teams negatively influenced performance for novices but positively influenced integrative outcomes for trained negotiators. The implications of these results for theories of intergroup relations and negotiations are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey T. Polzer, 1996. "Intergroup Negotiations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(4), pages 678-698, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:40:y:1996:i:4:p:678-698
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002796040004008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002796040004008
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002796040004008?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. Thompson, Leigh & Hastie, Reid, 1990. "Social perception in negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 98-123, 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. Beuk, Frederik & Rubin, Eran, 2021. "Data-based negotiator allocation management," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 537-552.
    2. Reina, Livia, 2003. "Negotiators' cognition: An experimental study on bilateral, integrative negotiation," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 05/03, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    3. Brett, Jeanne & Thompson, Leigh, 2016. "Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 68-79.
    4. Chmielecki Michał, 2020. "Cognitive Biases in Negotiation - Literature Review," Journal of Intercultural Management, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 31-52, June.
    5. David L. Coss, 2014. "Internal Controls And The Power Of Negotiation: The Role Of Identity Management In The Protection Of Information Assets," Portuguese Journal of Management Studies, ISEG, Universidade de Lisboa, vol. 0(1), pages 7-22.
    6. 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.
    7. Anca Maria CLIPA & Sorina POSTOLEA, 2017. "Investigating What Romanian It Recruiters And Employees Value When They Negotiate Employment Contract," SEA - Practical Application of Science, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 15, pages 321-329, December.
    8. Mislin, Alexandra A. & Campagna, Rachel L. & Bottom, William P., 2011. "After the deal: Talk, trust building and the implementation of negotiated agreements," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 55-68, May.
    9. Joel Harmon, 1998. "Electronic Meetings and Intense Group Conflict: Effects of a Policy-Modeling Performance Support System and an Audio Communication Support System on Satisfaction and Agreement," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 131-153, March.
    10. Lehmann-Waffenschmidt, Marco & Reina, Livia, 2003. "Coalition formation in multilateral negotiations with a potential for logrolling: An experimental analysis of negotiators' cognition processes," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 17/03, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    11. Anca-Maria Clipa & Cătălin-Ioan Clipa & Magdalena Danileț & Andreia Gabriela Andrei, 2019. "Enhancing Sustainable Employment Relationships: An Empirical Investigation of the Influence of Trust in Employer and Subjective Value in Employment Contract Negotiations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-16, September.
    12. Leeuwen, Jerry van & Heijden, Hans van der & Kronsteiner, Reinhard, 2003. "Group Decision Support for Resource Allocation Decisions in Three-Person Groups," Serie Research Memoranda 0025, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    13. Anca Maria CLIPA, 2018. "Employment Contract Negotiations For Romanian It Employees And Their Willingness For Future (Re)Negotiations," SEA - Practical Application of Science, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 18, pages 307-312, December.
    14. Rhode, Alexander & Schönbohm, Avo & van Vliet, Jacobus, 2014. "The tactical utilization of cognitive biases in negotiations," Working Papers 80, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute of Management Berlin (IMB).
    15. Wendi L. Adair & Jeanne M. Brett, 2005. "The Negotiation Dance: Time, Culture, and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 33-51, February.
    16. Kopelman, Shirli & Rosette, Ashleigh Shelby & Thompson, Leigh, 2006. "The three faces of Eve: Strategic displays of positive, negative, and neutral emotions in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 81-101, January.
    17. Jessica Bregant & Alex Shaw & Katherine D. Kinzler, 2016. "Intuitive Jurisprudence: Early Reasoning About the Functions of Punishment," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 693-717, December.
    18. Hamrick, Jennifer & Schafer, Jennifer & DeZoort, Todd, 2023. "The effect of client gender and negotiation style on auditors' proposed audit adjustments," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    19. Joanna Różycka-Tran & Guido Alessandri & Paweł Jurek & Michał Olech, 2018. "A test of construct isomorphism of the Belief in a Zero-Sum Game scale: A multilevel 43-nation study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, September.
    20. Curhan, Jared R. & Elfenbein, Hillary Anger & Xu, Heng, 2005. "What do People Value when they Negotiate? Mapping the Domain of Subjective Value in Negotiation," Working papers 18234, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.

    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:sae:jocore:v:40:y:1996:i:4:p:678-698. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.