University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Negotiation teams: The impact of caucusing and team accountability on interaction processes and outcomes

O'Connor, Kathleen Mary

This item is only available for download by members of the University of Illinois community. Students, faculty, and staff at the U of I may log in with your NetID and password to view the item. If you are trying to access an Illinois-restricted dissertation or thesis, you can request a copy through your library's Inter-Library Loan office or purchase a copy directly from ProQuest.

Permalink

https://hdl.handle.net/2142/21752

Description

Title
Negotiation teams: The impact of caucusing and team accountability on interaction processes and outcomes
Author(s)
O'Connor, Kathleen Mary
Issue Date
1994
Doctoral Committee Chair(s)
Carnevale, Peter J.
Department of Study
Psychology
Discipline
Psychology
Degree Granting Institution
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Degree Name
Ph.D.
Degree Level
Dissertation
Keyword(s)
  • Psychology, Social
  • Psychology, Industrial
  • Sociology, Industrial and Labor Relations
Language
eng
Abstract
The model proposed here suggests that within-team processes in team negotiation moderate the effect of situational variables (e.g., accountability) on between-team negotiation processes. To test this model, representation structure (teams that caucus, teams that do not caucus, and solo negotiators) was crossed with accountability to constituents (low, high). The model was supported in this study. Following a pre-negotiation task phase, solo negotiators reported that they trusted the other less than teams did. Yet, teams made more individualistic first offers. These effects were enhanced under conditions of high accountability such that solos in this condition had lower first offers than teams and also felt they were less advantaged in the upcoming negotiation than negotiators in any other condition. There was no effect for caucusing. Following the negotiation, teams were more accurate in their judgments of the other's priorities for the integrative issues, but not the common value issue. This cognitive advantage did not translate into more integrative outcomes for teams. Following the negotiation, teams more than solos reported that they were more powerful than the other party; teams liked the other party less than solos did; and, solos trusted the other party more than teams did. Under conditions of low accountability, teams achieved the highest outcomes for the integrative issues. Implications for these results on future studies of team negotiation are also discussed.
Type of Resource
text
Permalink
http://hdl.handle.net/2142/21752
Copyright and License Information
Copyright 1994 O'Connor, Kathleen Mary

Owning Collections

Graduate Dissertations and Theses at Illinois PRIMARY
Graduate Theses and Dissertations at Illinois
Dissertations and Theses - Psychology
Dissertations and Theses from the Dept. of Psychology