Woman, man or simply negotiator ? Antecedents and consequences of one's gender approach in mixed-gender negotiations
(2020)
Files
these_neptina_manea_final_version.pdf
Open Access - Adobe PDF
- 1.68 MB
Details
- Authors
- Supervisors
- Abstract
- For years, research has portrayed women as both less willing and less able to overcome male counterparts in mixed-gender negotiations (e.g., Babcock & Laschever, 2003; Babcock et al., 2006; Greenhalgh & Gilkey, 1993; Kray et al., 2001; Kray & Gelfand, 2009; Small et al., 2007). Recently however, this discrepancy was acknowledged to not necessarily be due to gender itself. Rather of, various situational factors are now known to interact in causing the previously reported gender effects at the bargaining table. In this thesis, we contribute to this last line of research by focusing upon an ignored up to now, yet potentially important variable in mixed gender negotiations, i.e., the gender ideology one endorses (Hahn et al., 2015; Koenig & Richeson, 2010). Building upon past work (e.g., Bear, 2011; Bear & Babcock, 2012; Eagly & Karau, 2002; Kray et al., 2002), we first argue that one’s choice of gender handling strategies varies along with their gender congruence to the task (gender congruent vs. gender incongruent task) and with the expected negotiation outcomes (wanted vs. unwanted outcomes). We then assess both antecedents and consequences of supporting different gender ideologies, to better understand when and how one’s gender approach might impact previously reported gender effects in negotiation. As a set, our studies suggest gender ideologies to indeed vary along with factors such as context, inequity predisposing traits or the bargaining topic. Moreover, one’s gender approach is revealed as potentially significant to better understanding gender effects in negotiations.
- Affiliations
Citations
Manea, C.-N. (2020). Woman, man or simply negotiator ? Antecedents and consequences of one’s gender approach in mixed-gender negotiations. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/28509