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.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, V. L. 1965. Situational factors in conformity. In Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 2, edited by L. Berkowitz, 133-175. New York: Academic Press.
2.
Asch, S. E. 1952. Social psychology. New York: Prentice Hall.
3.
Bazerman, M. H., T. Magliozzi , and M. A. Neale. 1985. The acquisition of an integrative response in a competitive market. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance34:294-313.
4.
Bazerman, M. H. , E. A. Mannix, and L. L. Thompson. 1988. Groups as mixed-motive negotiations. In Advances in group processes: Theory and research, Vol. 5, edited by E. J. Lawler and B. Markovsky, 195-216. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
5.
Brewer, M. B.1979. In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychology Bulletin86:307-324.
6.
Brewer, M. B. , and R. M. Kramer. 1985. The psychology of intergroup attitudes and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology36:219-243.
7.
Brewer, M. B. , and M. Silver. 1978. Ingroup bias as a function of task characteristics. European Journal of Social Psychology8:393-400.
8.
Deschamps, J. , and R. Brown. 1983. Superordinate goals and intergroup conflict. British Journal of Social Psychology22:189-195.
9.
Friedman, R. , and J. Podolny. 1992. Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: Labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly37:28-47.
10.
Graham, J. , and R. Herberger. 1983. Negotiators abroad: Don't shoot from the hip. Harvard Business Review4 (July-August):160-168.
11.
Gruder, C. L.1971. Relationships with opponent and partner in mixed-motive bargaining. Journal of Conflict Resolution15:403-416.
12.
Hill, G. W.1982. Group versus individual performance: Are N + 1 heads better than one?Psychological Bulletin91:517-539.
13.
Insko, C. A. , R. H. Hoyle, R. L. Pinkley, G. Hong, R. M. Slim, B. Dalton, Y. Lin, P. Ruffin, G. Dardis, P. Bernthal, and J. Schopler. 1988. Individual-group discontinuity: The role of a consensus rule. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology24:505-519.
14.
Insko, C. A. , R. L. Pinkley, R. H. Hoyle, B. Dalton, G. Hong, R. M. Slim, P. Landry, B. Holton, P. F. Ruffin, and J. Thibaut. 1987. Individual versus group discontinuity: The role of intergroup contact. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology23:250-267.
15.
Insko, C. A. , and J. Schopler. 1987. Categorization, competition, and collectivity. In Group processes, edited by C. Hendrick, 213-251. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
Keppel, G. 1982. Design and analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
Komorita, S. , and C. Lapworth. 1982. Cooperative choice among individuals versus groups in an N-person dilemma situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology42:487-496.
18.
Kramer, R. M.1989. Windows of vulnerability or cognitive illusions? Cognitive processes and the nuclear arms race. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology25:79-100.
19.
Kramer, R. M.1991. Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of categorization processes. Research in Organizational Behavior13:191-228.
20.
Kramer, R. M. , and M. B. Brewer. 1984. Effects of group identity on resource use decisions in a simulated commons dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology46:1044-1057.
21.
Lax, D. A. , and J. K. Sebenius. 1986. The manager as negotiator. New York: Free Press.
22.
Lewicki, R. , and J. Litterer. 1985. Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
23.
Maier, N. 1970. Problem-solving and creativity in individuals and groups. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
24.
McCallum, D. M. , K. Harring, R. Gilmore, S. Drenan, J. P. Chase, C. Insko, and J. Thibaut. 1985. Competition and cooperation between groups and between individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology21:301-320.
25.
Messick, D. M. , and D. M. Mackie. 1989. Intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology40:45-81.
26.
Morley, I. , J. Webb, and G. Stephenson. 1988. Bargaining and arbitration in the resolution of conflict. In The social psychology of intergroup conflict, edited by W. Stroebe, A. Kruglanski, D. Bar-Tal, and M. Hewstone, 117-134. New York: Springer-Verlag.
27.
Moscovici, S. 1985. Social influence and conformity. In Handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2, edited by G. Lindzey and E. Aronson, 347-412. New York: Random House.
28.
Neale, M. A. , and M. H. Bazerman. 1991. Cognition and rationality in negotiation. New York: Free Press.
29.
Neale, M. A. , M. H. Bazerman, G. B. Northcraft, and C. A. Alperson. 1986. “Choice shift” effects in group decisions: A decision bias perspective. International Journal of Small Group Research23:33-42.
30.
Neale, M. A. , and G. B. Northcraft. 1986. Experts, amateurs, and refrigerators: Comparing expert and amateur decision making on a novel task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes38:305-317.
31.
Pruitt, D. G. 1983. Achieving integrative agreements. In Negotiating in organizations, edited by M. H. Bazerman and R. J. Lewicki, 35-50. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
32.
Pruitt, D. G. , and J. Z. Rubin. 1986. Social conflict. New York: Random House.
33.
Schopler, J. , and C. Insko. 1992. The discontinuity effect in interpersonal and intergroup relations: Generality and mediation. In European review of social psychology, Vol. 3, edited by W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone, 121-151. New York: John Wiley.
34.
Shea, G. F. 1983. Creative negotiating. Boston: CBI.
35.
Sherif, M. , O. J. Harvey, B. J. White, W. A. Hood, and C. W. Sherif. 1961. Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The robbers cave experiment. Norman, OK: University Book Exchange.
36.
Steiner, I. D. 1972. Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
37.
Tajfel, H. , R. Billig, C. Bundy, and C. Flament. 1971. Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology1:149-178.
38.
Thompson, L. L.1990. Negotiation: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin108:515-532.
39.
Thompson, L. L. , and R. M. Hastie. 1990. Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes47:98-123.
40.
Turner, J. C. 1981. The experimental social psychology of intergroup behavior. In Intergroup behavior, edited by J. C. Turner and H. Giles, 66-101. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41.
Walton, R. E. , and R. B. McKersie. 1965. A behavioral theory of labor negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
