Intuition suggests that individual differences should play an important role in negotiation performance, and yet empirical results have been relatively weak. Because negotiations are inherently dyadic, the dyad needs to feature prominently in theorizing. In expanding the traditional treatment of individual differences to two systematically interconnected parties, a relational process model (RPM) emerges. The RPM illustrates how the individual differences of both negotiators spark complex behavioral dynamics through five distinct theoretical mechanisms. Individuals (a) select each other, (b) set expectancies for each other, (c) serve as behavioral triggers and affordances for each other, (d) reciprocate and complement each other’s behaviors, and (e) vary in their responses to identical behaviors. It also directs attention to new classes and dimensions of individual difference factors. The RPM helps explain why past research has been highly conservative. A more complete picture needs to incorporate the complex interplay starting with parties’ individual differences.
AbelsonR. P. (1981). Psychological status of the script concept. American Psychologist, 36, 715–729.
2.
AdairW. A.BrettJ. M. (2005). The negotiation dance: Time, culture, and behavioral sequences in negotiation. Organization Science, 16, 33–51.
3.
AndersenS. M.GlassmanN. S.ChenS.ColeS. W. (1995). Transference in social perception: The role of chronic accessibility in significant-other representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 41.
4.
AxelrodR. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. Basic Books.
5.
AyresI.February (1991). Fair driving: Gender and race discrimination in retail car negotiations. Harvard Law Review, 104, 817–872.
6.
BarghJ. A.ChenM.BurrowsL. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 71, 230–244.
7.
BarkerR. G. (1968). Ecological psychology: Concepts and methods for studying the environment of human behavior. Stanford University Press.
8.
BarryB.FriedmanR. A. (1998). Bargainer characteristics in distributive and integrative negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 345–359.
9.
BarsadeS. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 644–675.
10.
BatemanT. S. (1980). Contingent concession strategies in bargaining. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 212–221.
11.
BazermanM. H.CurhanJ. R.MooreD. A.ValleyK. L. (2000). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 279–314.
12.
BergerJ.FisekM.NormanR.ZelditchM. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction. Elsevier.
13.
BowlesH. R.BabcockL.McGinnK.L. (2005). Constraints and triggers: Situational mechanics of gender in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 951–965.
14.
BrettJ. M.LytleA.ShapiroD. (1998). Breaking the bonds of reciprocity in negotiation. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 410–424.
15.
BussD. M. (1987). Selection, evocation, and manipulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1214–1221.
16.
BussD. M.CraikK.H. (1983). The act-frequency approach to personality. Psychological Review, 90, 105–126.
17.
ButtA. N.ChoiJ. N.JaegerA. M. (2005). The effects of self-emotion, counterpart emotion, and counterpart behavior on negotiator behavior: A comparison of individual-level and dyad-level dynamics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 681–704.
18.
ByrneD. (1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 713–715.
19.
ChoiV. S.GrayH. M.AmbadyN. (2005). The glimpsed world: Unintended communication and unintended perception. In HassinR. R.UlemanJ. S.BarghJ. A. (Eds.), The new unconscious (pp. 309–333). Oxford University Press.
20.
ChristieR.GeisF. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press.
21.
CroninM. A.BezrukovaK. (2019). Conflict management through the lens of system dynamics. Academy of Management Annals, 13, 770–806.
22.
CroninM. A.VancouverJ. B. (2019). The only constant is change: Expanding theory by incorporating dynamic properties into one’s models. In HumphreyS. E.LeBretonJ. M. (Eds.), The handbook of multilevel theory, measurement, and analysis (pp. 89–114). American Psychological Association.
23.
De DreuC. K. W.CarnevaleP. J. (2003). Motivational bases of information processing and strategy in negotiation and social conflict. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 235–291.
24.
DeutschM. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. Yale University Press.
25.
DimotakisN.ConlonD. E.IliesR. (2012). The mind and heart (literally) of the negotiator: Personality and contextual determinants of experiential reactions and economic outcomes in negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 183–193.
26.
DonohueW. A. (1981). Analyzing negotiation tactics: Development of a negotiation interact system. Human Communication Research, 7, 273–287.
27.
EisenkraftN.ElfenbeinH. A. (2010). The way you make me feel: Evidence for individual differences in affective presence. Psychological Science, 21, 505–510.
28.
ElfenbeinH. A. (2013). Individual differences in negotiation. In OlekalnsM.AdairW. L. (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Negotiation (pp. 25–45). Edward Elgar.
29.
ElfenbeinH. A. (2014). The many faces of emotional contagion: An affective process theory for affective linkage. Organizational Psychology Review, 4, 326–362.
30.
ElfenbeinH. A. (2015). Individual differences in negotiation: A nearly abandoned pursuit revived. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 131–136.
31.
ElfenbeinH. A.CurhanJ. R.EisenkraftN.ShirakoA.BaccaroL. (2008). Are some negotiators better than others? Individual differences in bargaining outcomes. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1463–1475.
32.
ElfenbeinH. A.EisenkraftN.CurhanJ. R.DiLallaL. F. (2018). On the relative importance of individual-level characteristics and dyadic interaction effects in distributive negotiations: Variance partitioning evidence from a twins study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103, 88–96.
33.
EmmonsR. A.DienerE.LarsenR. J. (1986). Choice and avoidance of everyday situations and affect congruence: Two models of reciprocal interactionism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 815–826.
34.
FalcãoH. (2012). Value negotiation: How to finally get the win-win right. FT Press.
35.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.
36.
FleesonW. (2004). Moving personality beyond the person-situation debate: The challenge and the opportunity of within-person variability. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 83–87.
37.
FunderD. C. (2008). Persons, situations and person-situation interactions. In JohnO. P.RobinsR.PervinL. (Eds.), Handbook of Personality (3rd ed., pp 568–580). Guilford.
38.
GelfandM. J.BrettJ. M. (2004). The handbook of negotiation and culture. Stanford Business Books.
39.
GibsonJ. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
40.
GneezyU.ListJ.PriceM. K. (2012). Toward an understanding of why people discriminate: Evidence from a series of natural field experiments (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series, No. 17855).
41.
GoffmanE. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday.
42.
GottmanJ. M. (1979). Marital interaction: Experimental investigations. Academic Press.
43.
GrossJ. (2001). Emotion regulation in adulthood: Timing is everything. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 214–219.
44.
HarrisonD.PriceK.BellM. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 96–107.
45.
HatfieldE.CacioppoJ. T.RapsonR. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. Cambridge University Press.
46.
IckesW.SnyderM.GarciaS. (1997). Personality influences on the choice of situations. In HoganR.JohnsonJ. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology, pp.165–195. Academic Press.
47.
IzardC. E. (1960). Personality similarity, positive affect, and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 484–485.
48.
JangD.ElfenbeinH. A.BottomW. P. (2018). More than a phase: Form and features of a general theory of negotiation. Academy of Management Annals, 12, 318–356.
49.
KelleyH. H.StahelskiA. J. (1970). Social interaction basis of cooperators’ and competitors’ beliefs about others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 66–91.
50.
KennedyJ. A.KrayL. J. (2015). A pawn in someone else’s game? The cognitive, motivational, and paradigmatic barriers to women’s excelling in negotiation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 35, 3–28.
51.
KennyD. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. Guilford Press.
52.
KolbD.WilliamsJ. (2001). The shadow negotiation: How women can master the hidden agendas that determine bargaining success. Simon & Schuster.
53.
KrayL. J.ThompsonL. (2005). Gender stereotypes and negotiation performance: An examination of theory and research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 103–182.
54.
LawlerE. J.YoonJ. (1996). Commitment in exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational cohesion. American Sociological Review, 61, 89–108.
55.
LaxD. A.SebeniusJ. K. (2006). 3-D Negotiation: Powerful tools to change the game in your most important deals. Harvard Business School Press.
56.
LevesqueM. J.KennyD. A. (1993). Accuracy of behavioral predictions at zero acquaintance: A social relations analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 65, 1178–1187.
57.
LewickiR. J.LittererJ. A. (1985). Negotiation. Richard D. Irwin.
MazeiJ.HüffmeierJ.FreundP. A.StuhlmacherA. F.BilkeL.HertelG. (2015). A meta-analysis on gender differences in negotiation outcomes and their moderators. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 85–104.
60.
McGinnK. L.KerosA. T. (2002). Improvisation and the logic of exchange in socially embedded transactions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 442–473.
61.
MischelW. (1977). The interaction of person and situation. In MagnussonD.EndlerN. S. (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology (pp. 333–352). Lawrence Erlbaum.
62.
MischelW. (2004). Toward an integrative science of the person (Prefatory Chapter). Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 1–22.
63.
MislinA. A.CampagnaR. L.BottomW. P. (2011). After the deal: Talk, trust building and the implementation of negotiated agreements. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 55–68.
MoskowitzD. S.HoM. H. R.Turcotte-TremblayA. M. (2007). Contextual influences on interpersonal complementarity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1051–1063.
66.
MuellerJ. S.CurhanJ. R. (2006). Emotional intelligence and counterpart mood induction in a negotiation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 17, 110–128.
67.
NealeM. A.NorthcraftG. B. (1991). Behavioral negotiation theory: A framework for conceptualizing dyadic bargaining. Research in Organizational Behavior, 13, 147–190.
68.
ParkinsonB.SimonsG. (2012). Worry spreads: Interpersonal transfer of problem-related anxiety. Cognition & Emotion, 26, 462–479.
69.
PruittD. G. (1981). Negotiation behavior. Academic Press.
70.
PruittD. G. (1983). Achieving integrative agreements. In BazermanM. H.LewickiR. J. (Eds.), Negotiating in organizations (pp. 35–49). Sage.
71.
PruittD. G.CarnevaleP. J. (1993). Negotiation in social conflict. Brooks/Cole.
72.
PruittD. G.LewisS. A. (1975). Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 621–630.
73.
PutnamL. L.JonesT. S. (1982). Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communication Monographs, 49, 171–191.
74.
RaushH. L. (1965). Interaction sequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 487–499.
75.
RaushH. L.BarryW. A.HertelR. K.SwainM. A. (1974). Communication, conflict, and marriage. Jossey-Bass.
76.
ReisH. T. (2009). Relationships are situations, and situations involve relationships. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 266–266.
77.
RidgewayC.L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 637–655.
78.
RosenthalR.JacobsonL. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
79.
RubinJ. Z.BrownB. R. (1975). The social psychology of bargaining and negotiation. Academic Press.
80.
SchneiderB. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453.
81.
SharmaS.BottomW.ElfenbeinH. A. (2013). On the role of personality, cognitive ability, and emotional intelligence in predicting negotiation outcomes: A meta-analysis. Organizational Psychology Review, 3, 293–336.
82.
SharmaS.ElfenbeinH. A.FosterJ.BottomW. P. (2018). Predicting negotiation performance from personality traits: A field study across diverse occupations. Human Performance, 31, 1–20.
83.
SmallD.GelfandM. J.BabcockL.GettmanH. (2007). Who gets to the bargaining table: The influence of gender and framing on the propensity to initiate negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 600–613.
84.
SnyderM.TankeE. D.BerscheidE. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior. On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 656–666.
85.
TettR. P.BurnettD. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500–517.
86.
ThompsonL. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 515–532.
87.
ThompsonL.HastieR. (1990). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 98–123.
88.
TinsleyC. H.O’ConnorK. M.SullivanB. A. (2002). Tough guys finish last: The perils of a distributive reputation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 621–645.
89.
Van KleefG. A.HomanA. C.CheshinA. (2012). Emotional influence at work: Take it EASI. Organizational Psychology Review, 2, 311–339.
90.
WaltonR. E.McKersieR. B. (1965). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations. McGraw Hill.
91.
WeingartL. R.BennettR. J.BrettJ. M. (1993). The impact of consideration of issues and motivational orientation on group negotiation process and outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 504–517.
92.
WeingartL. R.ThompsonL. L.BazermanM. H.CarrollJ. S. (1990). Tactical behavior and negotiation outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1, 7–31.
93.
WhiteJ. B.TynanR.GalinskyA. D.ThompsonL. L. (2004). Face threat sensitivity in negotiation: Roadblock to agreement and joint gain. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 94, 102–124.
94.
WigginsJ. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 395–412.
95.
WilsonK. S.DeRueD. S.MattaF. K.HoweM.ConlonD. E. (2016). Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1405–1421.
96.
YangY.ReadS. J.MillerL. C. (2009). The concept of situations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1018–1037.
97.
ZussmanA. (2013). Ethnic discrimination: Lessons from the Israeli online market for used cars. The Economic Journal, 123, F433–F468.
