The Impact of the Negotiators’ Personality and Socio-Demographic Factors on Their Perception of Unethical Negotiation Tactics
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose; The study aims to examine the impact of a negotiator’s profile (personality, gender, age and experience) on his perception of unethical negotiation tactics.Design/methodology/approach; A survey has been conducted among 220 middle manager employees and chief executive officers (CEOs) who are directly involved in the negotiation processes and activities for their organizations. A component factor analysis (CFA) was first performed. Then, a multiple regression analysis and ANOVA analysis were conducted to test the study hypotheses.Findings; The study suggests that negotiators with a high level of ‘openness to experience’ perceive the use of ‘traditional competitive bargaining’ and ‘inappropriate information gathering’ as ethical. However, ‘conscientious’ negotiators perceive the use of ‘misrepresentation of information’ and ‘inappropriate information gathering’ as unethical. In addition, negotiators with a high level of ‘agreeableness’ perceive the use of ‘misrepresentation of information’ as inappropriate. ‘Misrepresentation of information’ was perceived as more inappropriate for women than for men. Finally, older and highly experienced negotiators perceive ‘inappropriate information gathering’ as unethical more than younger and less experienced ones.Research limitations/implications; The study measures perceptions rather than actual behavior.Practical implications; The study findings could help firms to identify the more suitable profiles in terms of socio-demographic variables and also personality traits for positions related to negotiation with their stakeholders, especially for those with more long-term orientations.Social implications; Recognizing the potential of businesses to provide an important contribution to society and the large influence of business ethics in people’s everyday lives, including business managers’, trigger a better grasp of the factors that help alleviate unethical practices and that nurture a business culture embedded in an increasing demand for business ethics worldwide. Negotiators are not the exception. Hence, identifying which personality traits are likely to predispose negotiators to endorse unethical negotiation tactics may help shape training programs suitable to produce favorable inclinations to comply with ethical negotiations’ principles. This seems to be possible, on the face of the recent findings suggesting the likelihood of personality traits changes, following the implementation of some particular actions.Originality/value; To the best of our knowledge, this study is among the few that examine the impact of the negotiator’s personality traits and his socio-demographic variables on his perception of the appropriateness of negotiation tactics. This study is in line with calls to reconsider the role that personality plays in negotiation processes, ethical/unethical behavior and outcomes, after a long period of skepticism among scholars as to its significant impact.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».