Team Negotiation across Cultures: When and Where Are Two Heads Better Than One?

Abstract

Previous research on team negotiation has been confined to only U.S. contexts, and previous research on culture and negotiation has been confined to dyadic interactions. We extend this research by examining the conditions under which teams perform better than solos across two different cultural contexts, the U.S. and Taiwan. Study 1 examined team versus solo negotiations in deal-making contexts. Consistent with previous research (Thompson, Peterson, & Brodt, 1996), U.S. teams had an economic advantage over solos. U.S. teams set higher economic targets and limits, and achieved higher pareto efficiency and joint gain as compared to solos. Consistent with our predictions, however, Taiwanese teams had an economic disadvantage over solos in a deal-making context. Taiwanese teams set lower targets and limits and achieved lower pareto efficiency and joint gain as compared to solo negotiators. Study 2 extended this research by examining team versus solo negotiations in a different task context: disputing rather than dealing. As predicted, Taiwanese teams did have an economic advantage over solos in a disputing context, whereas U.S. teams did not have an economic advantage over solos in a disputing context. The results are discussed in terms of the need for more contextual models of culture and negotiation.