Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Lambs Among Lions? The Impact of Ethical Ideology on Negotiation Behaviors and Outcomes

Lambs Among Lions? The Impact of Ethical Ideology on Negotiation Behaviors and Outcomes <jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Relationships between individuals' ethical orientations (classified on dimensions of idealism and relativism), their negotiation strategies, their views of ethically ``marginal'' tactics, and their outcomes in dyadic negotiation are examined. Results indicate a relationship between ethical orientation and negotiation strategy. Specifically, absolutists (high on idealism, low on relativism) tended to employ more assertive negotiation strategies than did those of other ethical orientations. Individuals in no one category of ethical ideology outperformed those in any other category in terms of integrativeness of agreements or outcomes. Absolutists viewed ethically questionable tactics as less acceptable, whereas subjectivists found them more acceptable. We found that individuals less accepting of questionable tactics (``lambs''), who negotiated against those more accepting of such tactics (``lions''), were able to achieve better outcomes and a greater percentage of joint outcomes.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Negotiation Brill

Lambs Among Lions? The Impact of Ethical Ideology on Negotiation Behaviors and Outcomes

International Negotiation , Volume 7 (2): 235 – Jan 1, 2002

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/lambs-among-lions-the-impact-of-ethical-ideology-on-negotiation-EChiLDHpDL

References (21)

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2002 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1382-340X
eISSN
1571-8069
DOI
10.1163/138234002761384981
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Relationships between individuals' ethical orientations (classified on dimensions of idealism and relativism), their negotiation strategies, their views of ethically ``marginal'' tactics, and their outcomes in dyadic negotiation are examined. Results indicate a relationship between ethical orientation and negotiation strategy. Specifically, absolutists (high on idealism, low on relativism) tended to employ more assertive negotiation strategies than did those of other ethical orientations. Individuals in no one category of ethical ideology outperformed those in any other category in terms of integrativeness of agreements or outcomes. Absolutists viewed ethically questionable tactics as less acceptable, whereas subjectivists found them more acceptable. We found that individuals less accepting of questionable tactics (``lambs''), who negotiated against those more accepting of such tactics (``lions''), were able to achieve better outcomes and a greater percentage of joint outcomes.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

International NegotiationBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2002

Keywords: negotiation; ethics; deceptive bargaining tactics; ethical ideologies

There are no references for this article.