Gender Differences In Negotiation Research Articles

Enterprise education in undergraduate business programmes advances students' negotiating competence and self-confidence

PurposeBusiness graduates’ enterprising capability augments their work readiness, transforming them into professionals capable of driving successful outcomes. At the core lie self-confidence and negotiating competence. However, embedding enterprise education and developing assessments to evidence learning is challenging. This study aims to offer a blueprint for establishing enterprise learning in the classroom and investigating the effectiveness of cultivating negotiating competence and self-confidence.Design/methodology/approachModelled on Kolb’s experiential learning cycle, students engage in in-class and real-life negotiations, assessing self-confidence using a scale founded in Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. Open-ended reflections are also submitted. Quantitative data is analysed through multiple linear regression, while quantitative and qualitative data triangulation substantiates enterprise learning in negotiating competence and self-confidence.FindingsStudents’ reflections show that low self-confidence poses an initial barrier in negotiations, overcome with successive engagements. Quantitative analysis uncovers response-shift biases, with female and male students overestimating initial self-confidence levels. The gender and difference score type interaction reveals a more pronounced bias among female students starting from a lower baseline than male students, implying a more substantial self-confidence improvement for female students. These findings challenge traditional assumptions about gender differences in negotiations and emphasize the need for nuanced perspectives.Originality/valueEnterprising capability is pivotal for business professionals. This study highlights the advancement of negotiating competence and self-confidence. It contributes uniquely to the development of enterprise education pedagogy. Focusing on nuanced gender differences challenges prevailing assumptions, providing a perspective to the discourse on negotiating competence and self-confidence in management training.

Gender Differences in Negotiations and Labor Market Outcomes: Evidence from an Information Intervention with College Students

Gender Differences in Negotiations and Labor Market Outcomes: Evidence from an Information Intervention with College Students

Gender Differences in Negotiation: Can Interventions Reduce the Gap?

Gender differences in negotiation are seen as contributing to the persistent gender gaps in labor market outcomes. We review the literature on interventions aiming to mute differences in negotiation and assess their effectiveness in reducing the gender pay gap. We present research on initiatives that aspire to increase how often and how women negotiate, as well as institutional changes that ban negotiations, ban requests for employee salary history, and improve wage transparency. Along with reviewing evidence on the effectiveness of these initiatives, we point to unintended consequences that warrant caution at implementation. The review makes clear that initial efforts to push women to negotiate more like men have shifted to alter instead the conditions of the negotiation. This shift results not only from wanting to consider policies that “fix the institutions” rather than “fixing the women,” but also from evidence that these interventions are more successful in securing pay equity.

Gender Differences in Politeness Strategies in Negotiations in Sharktank America and Sharktank Vietnam: A Contrastive Analysis

Gender and language have long been an interesting field in sociolinguistics and pragmatics. In the current study, politeness - one of the core issues of modern pragmatics, is adapted to hopefully shed great light on the issue in Vietnamese and American contexts to explore the gender differences in negotiations. Employing descriptive, qualitative, and quantitative methods, the data recorded from 10 conversations in Shark Tank Vietnam Season 3 TV program and 1tenconversations in Shark Tank America were transcribed and analyzed to reveal the different strategies based on Brown and Levinson's theory (1987) used by gender group of Sharks (investors). The gender linguistic differences under the contrastive analysis theory feature the prominent politeness strategies used by investors in American and Vietnamese negotiations. Those are very significant to support the evaluation of language and gender in the current society and in a cross-culture context.

Closing the gender gap in medicine: the impact of a simulation-based confidence and negotiation course for women in graduate medical education

BackgroundCurrently, 75–80% of the medical workforce worldwide consists of women. Yet, women comprise 21% of full professors and less than 20% of department chairs and medical school deans. Identified causes of gender disparities are multifactorial including work-life responsibilities, gender discrimination, sexual harassment, bias, lack of confidence, gender differences in negotiation and leadership emergence, and lack of mentorship, networking, and/or sponsorship. A promising intervention for the advancement of women faculty is the implementation of Career Development Programs (CDPs). Women physician CDP participants were shown to be promoted in rank at the same rate as men by year five, and more likely to remain in academics after eight years compared to both men and women counterparts. The objective of this pilot study is to investigate the effectiveness of a novel, simulation-based, single-day CDP curriculum for upper-level women physician trainees to teach communication skills identified as contributing to medicine’s gender advancement gap.MethodsThis was a pilot, pre/post study performed in a simulation center implementing a curriculum developed to educate women physicians on 5 identified communication skills recognized to potentially reduce the gender gap. Pre- and post-intervention assessments included confidence surveys, cognitive questionnaires, and performance action checklists for five workplace scenarios. Assessment data were analyzed using scored medians and descriptive statistics, applying Wilcoxon test estimation to compare pre- versus post-curriculum intervention scores, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.ResultsEleven residents and fellows participated in the curriculum. Confidence, knowledge, and performance improved significantly after completion of the program. Pre-confidence: 28 (19.0–31.0); Post-confidence: 41 (35.0–47.0); p < 0.0001. Pre-knowledge: 9.0 (6.0–11.00); Post knowledge: 13.0 (11.0–15.0); p < 0.0001. Pre-performance: 35.0 (16.0–52.0); Post-performance: 46.0 (37–53.00); p < 0.0001.ConclusionOverall, this study demonstrated the successful creation of a novel, condensed CDP curriculum based on 5 identified communication skills needed for women physician trainees. The post-curriculum assessment demonstrated improved confidence, knowledge, and performance. Ideally, all women medical trainees would have access to convenient, accessible, and affordable courses teaching these crucial communication skills to prepare them for careers in medicine to strive to reduce the gender gap.

Communication Architecture Affects Gender Differences in Negotiation

Communication Architecture Affects Gender Differences in Negotiation

Negotiation Power and the Impact of Gender Differences

This study focuses on the intersection of power and gender in negotiations, which is seldom challenged in previous research. In an experiment with 72 negotiators, we consider issue authority as a proxy of power in negotiations and investigate how different power allocations affect the negotiation success. We learn that an increase in issue authority for one of the two parties does not necessarily lead to an increase in success. Especially, female negotiators rely on their negotiation power, rather than systematically improving mutual utilities. This article contributes to Emerson’s power-dependence theory, social role theory, role congruity theory, and gender role conflict theory by combining analyzing the impact of gender differences and power on the success. This study attempts to close the gap in the literature by focusing on the prospective function of gender role orientation in explaining gender differences in negotiation. The theoretical contribution is that females are not per se inferior in negotiations, but their performance decreases in scenarios of power asymmetries. On the contrary, unbalanced power decreases the likelihood of success. Negotiators cannot rely on a power advantage to increase their success.

Avoiding Backlash or Proving One\u2019s Manhood? Beliefs About Gender Differences in Negotiation

Gender differences in negotiation are typically explained by processes that concern women (e.g., women anticipate backlash for assertive behavior). Research has begun to suggest that processes that concern men (e.g., men want to be seen as “real” men) also help to explain gender differences. However, these 2 approaches typically remain disconnected. Thus, we examined both types of processes in 3 studies examining people’s beliefs about the causes of gender differences in negotiation (total N = 931). Our studies showed that people endorsed to a similar, and sometimes even greater, extent processes that concern men as underlying gender differences in negotiation. Moreover, people’s beliefs about the causes of gender differences in negotiation were related to perceptions of the effectiveness of different diversity initiatives (i.e., interventions to reduce inequities) and willingness to support them.

Gender Differences in Negotiation: Evidence from Real Estate Transactions

AbstractNegotiations over real estate show that men secure better prices than women. However, gender differences decrease when improving controls for the property's value, and is eliminated when controlling for unobserved heterogeneity in a repeated-sales sample. Rather than evidence of differences in negotiation, price differences result from men and women demanding different properties. Consistently, we find no gender difference in sales prices secured for inherited property. Provided appropriate controls, men and women fare equally well when negotiating over real estate. Our study demonstrates that inference on gender differences in negotiation relies critically on controlling for the value of the negotiated item.

How traditional gender roles hurt both women and men: negative processes and outcomes in mixed-gender negotiations

PurposeBased on the social role theory, role congruity theory and gender role conflict theory, this paper aims to investigate the mediating role of “relationship conflict” in the association between traditional gender role (TGR) endorsement and objective and subjective negotiation outcomes.Design/methodology/approachTwo experimental negotiation studies (n1 = 138, n2 = 128) were conducted at a US university.FindingsThis paper presents three original and noteworthy findings: One, in mixed-gender negotiations, as a dyad’s TGR endorsement increases, final agreements become significantly more likely to favor men than women. Two, in mixed-gender negotiations, TGR endorsement is significantly associated with a decreased ability to establish a pleasant, mutually satisfactory and successful business relationship, resulting in a possible future economic cost due to lost opportunity. Three, the heightened relationship conflict during the negotiation mediates the negative association between TGR endorsement and women’s economic outcomes.Research limitations/implicationsEmpirical findings support social role theory, role congruity theory and gender role conflict theory. The use of a distributive negotiation case and laboratory research methodology may limit the generalizability of findings.Practical implicationsFindings about the detrimental effects of TGR in mixed-gender negotiations magnify the importance of becoming aware of our TGR orientations and their potential negative consequences on our long-term collaborations. Also, it is necessary to provide negotiation trainings to both genders with regard to gender-driven conflicts and offer tools to prevent or tackle such conflicts.Social implicationsNegotiations are among the most consequential of social interactions as their results have a substantial impact on individuals’ careers and financial outcomes. Understanding the effect of TGRs is paramount to improve female representation, participation and effectiveness in management and leadership. Mixed-gender negotiations such as collective equality bargaining, workplace social interactions, work-life balance discourse are critical to establishing gender equality and fairness in organizations and societies.Originality/valueUnderstanding how gender influences negotiation processes and outcomes and using the findings to improve both genders’ negotiation success are crucial to establishing fairness and equity in society and business. This research attempts to close a gap in the literature by focusing on the potential function of gender role orientation in explaining gender differences in negotiation.

Strategies Aimed at Reducing Gender Differences in Negotiation Are Perceived by Women as Ineffective

Women often fare worse in negotiations than men. Negotiation researchers, trainers, and policymakers thus aim to find solutions—such as specific strategies for female negotiators—to reduce gender differences in negotiations. However, if using such a specific strategy is not perceived to yield benefits (e.g., better economic outcomes) as well as to include risks (e.g., unfavorable social evaluations), women should naturally be unlikely to use it. Hence, we examined 218 German women’s perceptions of three specific strategies (i.e., using a relational account, feminine charm, and confrontation) and three conventional strategies (i.e., assertiveness, yielding, and neutral behavior) using a hypothetical negotiation vignette. We found that women expected all three specific strategies to be less economically effective than regular assertiveness, which led to their lower likelihood to project using all three specific strategies. Moreover, all three specific strategies were expected to lead to less favorable social evaluations than yielding. This expectation also explained women’s lower likelihood to use feminine charm than to yield. Taken together, the specific strategies were perceived as ineffective. Future negotiation research, thus, needs to ensure that the characteristics of specific strategies do not render them unappealing, and trainers and policymakers need to pay attention to potential implementation gaps resulting from the specific strategies’ perceived ineffectiveness.

Gender Differences in Negotiation: Evidence from Real Estate Transactions

Abstract Negotiations over real estate show that men secure better prices than women. However, gender differences decrease when improving controls for the property's value, and is eliminated when controlling for unobserved heterogeneity in a repeated-sales sample. Rather than evidence of differences in negotiation, price differences result from men and women demanding different properties. Consistently, we find no gender difference in sales prices secured for inherited property. Provided appropriate controls, men and women fare equally well when negotiating over real estate. Our study demonstrates that inference on gender differences in negotiation relies critically on controlling for the value of the negotiated item.

Gender in negotiation: Preparing public administrators for the 21st century workplace

ABSTRACTThis exploratory study questions whether Master of Public Administration programs prepare future public administrators to how gender plays out in negotiations that occur in organizations. Negotiated Order and Second-Generation Bias perspectives provide the theoretical basis to understand that negotiations in organizations may privilege masculine practices. In light of this gender leaning, the classroom is a necessary incubator for understanding gender differences in negotiation. Curricula and survey response data retrieved from NASPAA accredited MPA programs suggest that gender in negotiation is not being addressed in the MPA classroom. Public managers must negotiate for scarce organizational resources including salary, promotion, and other workplace capital. Recognizing that gender in negotiation remains hidden under the shadow of second-generation bias is the first step to the success of future public administrators. We must begin to educate our future public managers with a distinctive negotiation skillset as they navigate the 21st century workplace.

I-O Psychology Has an Important Role to Play in Gender Differences in Negotiation

A major goal of Gardner, Ryan, and Snoeyink (2018) was to determine what steps are needed moving forward in examining gender representation in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Specifically, on the topic of pay differences, we highlight that gender differences in pay are in part due to differences in negotiation behaviors and/or experiences. Prior research demonstrates that female negotiators receive greater backlash than male negotiators—a possible explanation to why men tend to negotiate more often and more successfully than women (Bowles, Babcock, &amp; Lai, 2007). Based on this evidence, one next step in moving forward should involve providing resources and knowledge to improve negotiation skills and practices specifically aimed at eliminating differences between women and men in both propensity to negotiate and the evaluation/consequences of negotiating.

Do women underperform men in negotiations? The role of cultural knowledge

While most previous literature has found that women underperform men in negotiations, gender differences may depend on the type of cultural knowledge that men and women use to guide their negotiation behavior. In three studies, we examined how access to cultural knowledge affects gender differences in negotiations. Study 1 showed that Chinese women performed relatively better against Chinese men compared to Israeli women against Israeli men in distributive negotiations. Notably, these gender effects on negotiation performance were magnified among those whose gender stereotypes reflected the consensus stereotypes of each society, which emphasized that men were more agentic in Israel and more relational in China. In Study 2, we manipulated knowledge of cultural values among Chinese negotiators and found that access to cultural knowledge that emphasized aggressive negotiating (instead of relational negotiating) was associated with weaker distributive outcomes for men and stronger negotiation outcomes for women. Finally, in Study 3 we found that Chinese women who negotiated relationally were more likely to suffer backlash when their partner had more experience negotiating with state-owned-enterprises, reflecting chronic exposure to knowledge of Chinese values. The impact of our findings on research on negotiations, culture, and gender inequality are discussed.

On the cultural basis of gender differences in negotiation

We study how culture and social structure influence bargaining behavior across gender, by exploring the negotiation culture in matrilineal and patriarchal societies using data from a laboratory experiment and a natural field experiment. One interesting result is that in both the actual marketplace and in the laboratory bargaining game, women in the matrilineal society earn more than men, at odds with years of evidence observed in the western world. We find that this result is critically driven by which side of the market the person is occupying: female (male) sellers in the matrilineal (patriarchal) society extract more of the bargaining surplus than male (female) sellers. In the buyer role, however, we observe no significant differences across societies.

Negotiating with work friends: examining gender differences in team negotiations

PurposeThis study aims to investigate whether a team of females negotiates differently than a team of males, and whether (workplace) friendship moderates the relationship between single-gender team composition and negotiation outcomes.Design/methodology/approachThe authors used two laboratory studies and paired 216 MBA students into single-gender teams of friends and non-friends, and then engaged them in several dyadic multi-issue negotiations.FindingsThe results show that on average, male teams of non-friends reached significantly better outcomes than female teams of non-friends. However, and interestingly, female teams of friends perform equally to male teams of friends.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors contribute both to the negotiations and the workplace friendship literature because very little research has examined negotiation among friends at work and in particular team negotiations. In addition, the authors also contribute to the literature on gender differences in negotiations because existing research has rarely examined the differences between all-male and all-female teams and especially the relationship between same-sex teams and their effects on negotiation outcomes.Practical implicationsThis research has clear implications to managers with regard to team composition. Specifically, a winning all-female team should not be changed!Originality/valueThis is the first study to examine the relationship between workplace friendship, gender and negotiation outcomes.

Entitled Women but Not Men Make Tougher Strategic Demands as Proposers in the Ultimatum Game

Newer version published at DP 1756 (2018). Please cite the new version: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/182227

Gender Differences in Negotiation: Implications for Salary Negotiations

Author(s): Johnson, Julia | Abstract: Despite incentives aimed at achieving equality for women in the workforce, women continue to lag behind men in terms of pay and leadership positions. This is despite the fact that women, on average, have equal or better educational credentials and offer comparable skill sets to employers. A variety of causal factors have been postulated for this disparity, including women’s tendency to choose to enter fields with lower pay at higher rates than men, and their greater concern for work-life balance in order to prioritize childcare obligations. However, another contributing factor exists that receives less attention: often, women are not as effective at self-advocacy in the workplace as are men. Women may fear the potential negative social consequences of ardent self-promotion, and this can lead to a reticence to negotiate that results in women receiving significantly less pay for the same work as men.Part II of this article explores the nature of the gender disparity manifested in the salary negotiations process. Part III discusses a number of culturally dictated gender stereotypes and behavioral norms that can act as obstacles to women’s success in salary negotiations. Finally, Part IV recommends several strategies and tactics intended to enhance women’s effectiveness in salary negotiations that women may take into consideration.

A meta-analysis on gender differences in negotiation outcomes and their moderators.

This meta-analysis investigates gender differences in economic negotiation outcomes. As suggested by role congruity theory, we assume that the behaviors that increase economic negotiation outcomes are more congruent with the male as compared with the female gender role, thereby presenting challenges for women's negotiation performance and reducing their outcomes. Importantly, this main effect is predicted to be moderated by person-based, situation-based, and task-based influences that make effective negotiation behavior more congruent with the female gender role, which should in turn reduce or even reverse gender differences in negotiation outcomes. Using a multilevel modeling approach, this meta-analysis includes 123 effect sizes (overall N = 10,888, including undergraduate and graduate students as well as businesspeople). Studies were included when they enabled the calculation of an effect size reflecting gender differences in achieved economic negotiation outcomes. As predicted, men achieved better economic outcomes than women on average, but gender differences strongly depended on the context: Moderator analysis revealed that gender differences favoring men were reduced when negotiators had negotiation experience, when they received information about the bargaining range, and when they negotiated on behalf of another individual. Moreover, gender differences were reversed under conditions of the lowest predicted role incongruity for women. In conclusion, gender differences in negotiations are contextually bound and can be subject to change. Future research is needed that investigates the underlying mechanisms of new moderators revealed in the current research (e.g., experience). Implications for theoretical explanations of gender differences in negotiation outcomes, for gender inequalities in the workplace, and for future research are discussed.