Abstract
Because negotiation is an integral part of social life, negotiators with different social motives are likely to meet. When this happens, will they be able to handle their differences constructively? We examined the relations between dyads’ social motive composition (cooperative, individualistic, or mixed), negotiation behavior, and economic and relational outcomes. In a laboratory experiment, 108 simulated negotiations were audiotaped, transcribed and coded. For economic outcomes, mixed dyads achieved higher profits than cooperative and individualistic dyads did, and this effect was mediated mainly by the negotiators’ problem-solving strategies. For relational outcomes, mixed and cooperative dyads experienced higher relational capital than individualistic dyads did, and this effect was mediated mainly by relationship management strategies. A follow-up survey conducted seven months later revealed that relational capital persisted over time. Overall, the results indicate that mixed-dyad negotiations between individualists and cooperators may bring out the best in both types of negotiators, making these dyads more successful than homogenous dyads.
Highlights
Negotiation is an integral part of social life, and can be defined as any social interaction engaged in by two or more interdependent parties using conversation to resolve a conflict of interest (Pruitt 1981)
We expect that members of individualistic dyads will have both low relational capital and low profits, as they tend to use contentious strategies, which neither accommodate their counterparts to build relational capital nor lead to high profits
We have presented three alternative sets of hypotheses regarding how profits and relational capital may be affected in mixed dyads
Summary
Negotiation is an integral part of social life, and can be defined as any social interaction engaged in by two or more interdependent parties using conversation to resolve a conflict of interest (Pruitt 1981). People explicitly and implicitly negotiate regularly; for example, individuals negotiate to resolve interpersonal conflict, employees negotiate with employers, buyers negotiate with sellers, and team members negotiate to coordinate teamwork. Shedding light to this question is of both theoretical and practical importance. It can help scholars better understand a core dynamic in negotiation, namely the simultaneous presence of cooperation and competition. It is of practical importance because it may help us better understand how negotiators can approach negotiations, as recent research has shown that individual negotiation styles and learning styles are very important in negotiations (Melzer and Schoop 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
