IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/8502.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Group Member Prototypicality and Intergroup Negotiation: How One's Standing in the Group Affects Negotiation Behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • van Kleef, G.A.
  • Steinel, W.
  • van Knippenberg, D.L.
  • Hogg, M.A.
  • Svensson, A.

Abstract

How does a representative's position in the group influence behaviour in intergroup negotiation? Applying insights from the social identity approach (specifically self-categorization theory), the effects of group member prototypicality, accountability, and group attractiveness on competitiveness in intergroup bargaining were examined. As representatives of their group, participants engaged in a computer-mediated negotiation with a simulated outgroup opponent. In Exp. 1 (N = 114), representatives with a peripheral status in the group sent more competitive and fewer cooperative messages to the opponent than did prototypical representatives, but only under accountability. Exp. 2 (N = 110) replicated this finding, and showed that, under accountability, peripherals also made higher demands than did prototypicals, but only when group membership was perceived as attractive. Results are discussed in relation to impression management and strategic behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • van Kleef, G.A. & Steinel, W. & van Knippenberg, D.L. & Hogg, M.A. & Svensson, A., 2006. "Group Member Prototypicality and Intergroup Negotiation: How One's Standing in the Group Affects Negotiation Behaviour," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-070-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:8502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/8502/ERS-2006-070-ORG.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Knippenberg, Daan & van Knippenberg, Barbara & van Dijk, Eric, 2000. "Who Takes the Lead in Risky Decision Making? Effects of Group Members' Risk Preferences and Prototypicality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 213-234, November.
    2. de Dreu, Carsten K. W. & Carnevale, Peter J. D. & Emans, Ben J. M. & van de Vliert, Evert, 1994. "Effects of Gain-Loss Frames in Negotiation: Loss Aversion, Mismatching, and Frame Adoption," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 90-107, 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. Benistant, Julien & Suchon, Rémi, 2021. "It does (not) get better: Reference income violation and altruism," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. Michele Griessmair & Daniel Druckman, 2018. "To Match or Not to Match? Reactions to Turning Points in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-83, February.
    3. Giessner, S.R. & van Knippenberg, D.L. & Sleebos, E., 2008. "License to Fail? How Leader Group Prototypicality Moderates the Effects of Leader Performance on Perceptions of Leadership Effectiveness," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-066-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    4. Healey, Mark P. & Bleda, Mercedes & Querbes, Adrien, 2021. "Opportunity evaluation in teams: A social cognitive model," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    5. Yolanda N. Li & Kenneth S. Law & Ming Yan, 2019. "Other-caring or other-critical? A contagious effect of leaders’ emotional triads on subordinates’ performance," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 995-1021, December.
    6. Blount, Sally & Larrick, Richard P., 2000. "Framing the Game: Examining Frame Choice in Bargaining," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 43-71, January.
    7. Peter J. Carnevale, 2008. "Positive affect and decision frame in negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 51-63, January.
    8. Ravetti, Chiara & Sarr, Mare & Munene, Daniel & Swanson, Tim, 2019. "Discrimination and favouritism among South African workers: Ethnic identity and union membership," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Shalvi, Shaul & Reijseger, Gaby & Handgraaf, Michel J.J. & Appelt, Kirstin C. & ten Velden, Femke S. & Giacomantonio, Mauro & De Dreu, Carsten K.W., 2013. "Pay to walk away: Prevention buyers prefer to avoid negotiation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 40-49.
    10. Cary Deck & Jungmin Lee & Javier Reyes & Chris Rosen, 2012. "Risk‐Taking Behavior: An Experimental Analysis of Individuals and Dyads," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 79(2), pages 277-299, October.
    11. Elizabeth E. Umphress & John B. Bingham, 2011. "When Employees Do Bad Things for Good Reasons: Examining Unethical Pro-Organizational Behaviors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 621-640, June.
    12. Nieboer, Jeroen, 2015. "Group member characteristics and risk taking by consensus," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 81-88.
    13. Kuhberger, Anton, 1998. "The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 23-55, July.
    14. Schweitzer, Maurice E. & Hershey, John C. & Bradlow, Eric T., 2006. "Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 1-19, September.
    15. Majer, Johann M. & Zhang, Kai & Zhang, Hong & Höhne, Benjamin P. & Trötschel, Roman, 2022. "Give and take frames in shared-resource negotiations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    16. Palmeira, Mauricio M. & Krishnan, H. Shanker, 2008. "Criteria instability and the isolated option effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 153-167, July.
    17. Amira Galin, 2013. "Endowment Effect in negotiations: group versus individual decision-making," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(3), pages 389-401, September.
    18. Northcraft, Gregory B. & Preston, Jared N. & Neale, Margaret A. & Kim, Peter H. & Thomas-Hunt, Melissa C., 1998. "Non-linear Preference Functions and Negotiated Outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 54-75, January.
    19. Alfred Wong & Dean Tjosvold, 2006. "Collectivist values for learning in organizational relationships in China: the role of trust and vertical coordination," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 299-317, September.
    20. Sriram Venkiteswaran & Rangaraja P. Sundarraj, 2021. "How Angry are You? Anger Intensity, Demand and Subjective Value in Multi-round Distributive Electronic Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 143-170, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Group Member Prototypicality; Intergroup Negotiation; Negotiation Behaviour; Representatives Bahaviour;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation

    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:ems:eureri:8502. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.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.