关键词: 动机倾向, 信息分享数量, 信息分享质量, 判断准确性, 联合收益

Abstract: One purpose of this study was to examine the whole negotiation process from motivational orientation, to negotiation behaviors, then to judgment accuracy, and finally to joint gains. Another purpose was to explore the role of information sharing quality in negotiation. According to the theory of cooperation and competition (Deutsch, 1949, 1973), cooperative negotiators are more inclined to engage in constructive problem solving than individualistic negotiators. Thus, we predicted that cooperatively oriented negotiating dyads would achieve higher joint gains than mixed dyads or individualistically oriented dyads, and mixed dyads would achieve higher joint gains than individualistically oriented dyads. Exchanging information allows negotiators to have accurate insights into each other’s interests, and thus helps them find integrative solutions (e.g., Bazerman & Neale, 1992). However, sharing much information does not necessarily lead to accurate judgments unless such sharing is effective. Thus, we conjectured that both information sharing quantity and quality would be positively related to joint gains, and information sharing quality would be more predictive. We also made hypotheses to confirm judgment accuracy would be positively related to joint gains. Finally, based on the above literature review and hypotheses, we hypothesized that information sharing quality would mediate the relationship between motivational orientation and joint gains and judgment accuracy would mediate the relationship between information sharing quality and joint gains.
A simulated one-to-one negotiation called “New Car” was used to collect data. The four negotiating issues were financing, color, warranty, and delivery date. Financing and warranty were integrative issues and color was a compatible issue. Participants were 226 MBA students. They were randomly assigned to a buyer or seller role and then paired to negotiate. Negotiators prepared for 15 minutes based on the given material including their confidential information. Then they bargained for 30 minutes. At the end of negotiation, each dyad completed the Final Contract and submitted to the instructor. Then they were asked to fill out the post-negotiation questionnaire in which motivational orientation, information sharing quantity and quality, and judgment accuracy were measured. Data from both the seller and the buyer were used to create the variables at the dyadic level, and all the analyses were at the dyadic level.
T-test showed that the cooperative dyads processed higher quality of information sharing and achieved higher joint gains than the individualistic dyads. Correlation analysis indicated that both information sharing quantity and quality were positively related to joint gains and regression result showed that information sharing quality predicted joint gains better than information sharing quantity. Correlation analysis also indicated that information sharing quality was positively related to priority judgment accuracy and priority judgment accuracy was positively related to joint gains. Combined with the above hypothesis testing, hierarchical regression results showed that information sharing quality fully mediated the effect of motivational orientation on joint gains and priority judgment accuracy partially mediated the effect of information sharing quality on joint gains.
This study uncovered the whole negotiation process from motivational orientation to joint gains, providing evidence for existing negotiation theories and improving people’s understandings of negotiation process. It also sheds light on the importance of information sharing quality in negotiation, suggesting that both scholars and practitioners should pay attention not only to how much information negotiators share but also to how effective their information sharing is. In addition, this study tells us that cooperative orientation can improve the quality of information sharing and thus enhance the quality of negotiation outcomes.

Key words: motivational orientation, information sharing quantity, information sharing quality, judgment accuracy, joint gains