This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nauta, A. Articles by Wijngaard, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Power and Biased Perceptions of Interdepartmental Negotiation Behavior

University of Groningen, The Netherlands, a.nauta{at}bdk.rug.nl

Jan de Vries

University of Groningen, The Netherlands

Jacob Wijngaard

University of Groningen, The Netherlands

This study examined whether employees who were involved in interdepartmental negotiations had biased perceptions of their own negotiation behavior and that of the other department, and whether power differences between departments were associated with these biased perceptions. The results of a study in 11 manufacturing organizations among 41 members of low-power planning departments and 44 members of high-power sales departments showed that both planning and sales employees believed that they showed more problem solving than the other department. Power was associated with perceptions of contending: planning employees seemed to overstate differences in contending behavior (‘Sales contends much more than we do’), whereas sales employees seemed to understate differences in contending behavior.

Key Words: interdepartmental coordination • intergroup bias • negotiation • power

References

• Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (Eds.). (1999). Social identity and social cognition. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• De Dreu, C. K. W., Nauta, A., & Van de Vliert, E. (1995). Self-serving evaluations of conflict behavior and escalation of the dispute. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 2049-2066.[CrossRef]
• Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations. The social identity approach. London: Sage.
• Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25, 121-140.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Janssen, O., & Van de Vliert, E. (1996). Concern for the other’s goals: Key to (de-)escalation of conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 7, 99-120.
• Kim, Y. (1996). Big customers, selling expenses and profit margin. Journal of Economic Research, 1, 311-326.
• Konijnendijk, P. A. (1994). Coordinating marketing and manufacturing in ETO companies. International Journal of Production Economics, 37, 19-26.
• Kramer, R. M., Newton, E., & Pommerenke, P. L. (1993). Self-enhancement biases and negotiator judgment: Effects of self-esteem and mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56, 110-133.[CrossRef]
• Messick, D. M., & Mackie, D. (1989). Intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 45-81.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Mullen, B., Brown, R., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 103-122.
• Nauta, A., & Sanders, K. (2000). Interdepartmental negotiation behavior in manufacturing organizations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 107-133.
• Pruitt, D. G., & Carnevale, P. J. (1993). Negotiation in social conflict. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
• Rubin, J.Z., Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (1994). Social conflict. Escalation, stalemate, and settlement. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Rubin, M., & Hewstone, M. (1998). Social identity’s self-esteem hypothesis: A review and some suggestions for clarification. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 40-62.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• St. John, C. H. (1991). Marketing and manufacturing agreement on goals and planned actions. Human Relations, 44, 211-229.[Abstract]
• Schmenner, R. W., & Swink, M. L. (1998). On theory in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 17, 97-113.[CrossRef]
• Skinner, W. (1974). The focused factory. Harvard Business Review, 52 (3), 113-121.
• Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223, 96-102.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.
• Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W.G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
• Thompson, L. L., & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 176-197.[CrossRef]
• Walton, R. E., Dutton, J. M., & Fitch, H. G. (1966). A study of conflict in the process, structure, and attitudes of lateral relationships. In A. M. Rubenstein & C. J. Haberstroh (Eds.), Some theories of organization (rev. ed., pp. 444-465). Homewood, IL: Irwin-Dorsey.
• White, R. K. (1977). Misperception in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 33, 190-221.

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nauta, A. Articles by Wijngaard, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?