M. Kouzakova, N. Ellemers, S. Harinck, D. Scheepers
We present two studies demonstrating the implications of having different values (vs. instrumental concerns) in a situation where people take conflicting positions. Study 1 (N=266) examined how people respond to a range of conflict issues that were framed either as referring to conflicting values or as referring to conflicting interests. Study 2 (N= 77) used a more immersive methodology, in which participants were led to consider either their values or interests in taking up a particular position, after which they were presented with a confederate who took up the opposite position. Results of both studies converge to demonstrate that framing a particular conflict issue in terms of values causes people to experience more self-involvement, and to perceive less common ground. This is seen as a potential explanation of why value conflicts tend to more easily escalate than conflicts of interests, but also offers scope for interventions that try to de-escalate and resolve the conflict by emphasizing instrumental rather than value differences.
{"title":"The Implications of Value Conflict: How Disagreement on Values Affects Self-Involvement and Perceived Common Ground","authors":"M. Kouzakova, N. Ellemers, S. Harinck, D. Scheepers","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1873145","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1873145","url":null,"abstract":"We present two studies demonstrating the implications of having different values (vs. instrumental concerns) in a situation where people take conflicting positions. Study 1 (N=266) examined how people respond to a range of conflict issues that were framed either as referring to conflicting values or as referring to conflicting interests. Study 2 (N= 77) used a more immersive methodology, in which participants were led to consider either their values or interests in taking up a particular position, after which they were presented with a confederate who took up the opposite position. Results of both studies converge to demonstrate that framing a particular conflict issue in terms of values causes people to experience more self-involvement, and to perceive less common ground. This is seen as a potential explanation of why value conflicts tend to more easily escalate than conflicts of interests, but also offers scope for interventions that try to de-escalate and resolve the conflict by emphasizing instrumental rather than value differences.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121875305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although contracts provide safeguards against risk, they can also signal low expectations for a relationship (e.g., suggesting a prenuptial agreement.) Three studies document how attempts to create more complete contracts, driven by a desire to effectively manage the potential pitfalls in a relationship, can crowd out rapport and undermine trust and cooperation. More specifically, this paper investigates the signaling effects of two aspects of contract completeness, specificity and the number of clauses in the contract. We found that complete contracts act as a signal (Study 1) and reduce relational expectations, subjective satisfaction, and trust (Study 2); they also lead to less cooperative behavior (Study 3). We discuss some of the implications of this paradox.
{"title":"The Relational Costs of Complete Contracts","authors":"E. Chou, N. Halevy, J. Murnighan","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1872569","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872569","url":null,"abstract":"Although contracts provide safeguards against risk, they can also signal low expectations for a relationship (e.g., suggesting a prenuptial agreement.) Three studies document how attempts to create more complete contracts, driven by a desire to effectively manage the potential pitfalls in a relationship, can crowd out rapport and undermine trust and cooperation. More specifically, this paper investigates the signaling effects of two aspects of contract completeness, specificity and the number of clauses in the contract. We found that complete contracts act as a signal (Study 1) and reduce relational expectations, subjective satisfaction, and trust (Study 2); they also lead to less cooperative behavior (Study 3). We discuss some of the implications of this paradox.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129558966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Negotiators often bargain on behalf of others. In many cases, these constituents set the goals they want their negotiators to achieve at the table. We argue that prior evidence for superior results of promotion-focused negotiators may not hold when goals are set by others. We report the results of a study in which negotiators were provided with external goals that were difficult to achieve in the given zone of agreement. We found that prevention-focused individuals planned better, and their dyads persisted longer in the negotiation than those with a promotion focus. Persistence led to higher joint outcomes for prevention-focused dyads than promotion-focused dyads. In addition, we found that agreeableness only affected individual financial outcomes for promotion-focused dyads, where high agreeableness led to poorer outcomes.
{"title":"When Vigilance Prevails: Regulatory Focus in Negotiations with External Goals","authors":"A. Peng, Jennifer E. Dunn, Donald E. Conlon","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1872558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872558","url":null,"abstract":"Negotiators often bargain on behalf of others. In many cases, these constituents set the goals they want their negotiators to achieve at the table. We argue that prior evidence for superior results of promotion-focused negotiators may not hold when goals are set by others. We report the results of a study in which negotiators were provided with external goals that were difficult to achieve in the given zone of agreement. We found that prevention-focused individuals planned better, and their dyads persisted longer in the negotiation than those with a promotion focus. Persistence led to higher joint outcomes for prevention-focused dyads than promotion-focused dyads. In addition, we found that agreeableness only affected individual financial outcomes for promotion-focused dyads, where high agreeableness led to poorer outcomes.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130273882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper reports on a study concerning the connection between the outcomes of neutral third party assisted environmental negotiations -- such as the nature of agreements reached, changes in relationships, and party satisfaction with the process – and negotiation process inputs and policy context. Negotiation process inputs include how negotiators address substantive issues, attributes of negotiator participation, and the role of neutral third parties. Policy context refers to factors such as the decision-making forum from which a negotiation emerged, and whether a negotiation concerns a pending or actual decision. These relationships are explored through an empirical study of 53 neutral third party assisted environmental negotiation cases at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Findings include significant relationships between certain substantive and participant process inputs (both directly and as enabling variables), the decision forum and decision status, and substantive and relational outcomes. The neutral third party factors considered show only a limited relationship to outcomes in these cases. There is also a significant amount of unexplained variation for some case outcomes. These findings have potential implications for negotiation theory, environmental negotiation practice, and future research.
{"title":"Substantive, Relational, and Proceudral Case Outcomes in Assisted Environmental Negotiations: Exploring the Relationship with Process Inputs, Neutral Third Party Roles, and Policy Context","authors":"W. Hall, Sanya Carley, A. Rowe","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1872139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872139","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports on a study concerning the connection between the outcomes of neutral third party assisted environmental negotiations -- such as the nature of agreements reached, changes in relationships, and party satisfaction with the process – and negotiation process inputs and policy context. Negotiation process inputs include how negotiators address substantive issues, attributes of negotiator participation, and the role of neutral third parties. Policy context refers to factors such as the decision-making forum from which a negotiation emerged, and whether a negotiation concerns a pending or actual decision. These relationships are explored through an empirical study of 53 neutral third party assisted environmental negotiation cases at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Findings include significant relationships between certain substantive and participant process inputs (both directly and as enabling variables), the decision forum and decision status, and substantive and relational outcomes. The neutral third party factors considered show only a limited relationship to outcomes in these cases. There is also a significant amount of unexplained variation for some case outcomes. These findings have potential implications for negotiation theory, environmental negotiation practice, and future research.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128595170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
People are influenced profoundly by the extent to which they perceive social situations as fair or unfair. Numerous studies have found that people perceive procedures that allow them an opportunity to voice their opinions as fairer and as more satisfying than procedures that do not allow them such an opportunity. However, people feel more frustrated when they receive low outcomes in procedures that include voice. This phenomenon is known as the “frustration effect”. Aims: In ultimatum and dictator games with voice, we tested the recipients’ reactions to having their voice disregarded. Method: In the control condition, participants played in the role of recipient in a one-period ultimatum, or dictator game, with or without voice. In the voice condition they could also send short pre-decisional messages to the allocators. In addition, they answered a post-experimental questionnaire pertaining to their levels of satisfaction and perceptions of outcome and procedural fairness. Results: 1. In the ultimatum game rejection rates of low offers were significantly higher in the voice condition. 2. The detected effect was stronger among male participants. 3. Feelings of anger, frustration and insult were higher in the voice, than in the no-voice condition, particularly in the ultimatum game. 4. Recipients’ dissatisfaction from low offers was more pronounced in the ultimatum than in the dictator game. 5. In both games, low offers were perceived as less fair in the voice, than in the no-voice condition. Main conclusions: Our findings lend strong support to the “frustration effect”. In addition, they suggest that a “deaf ear” to voice is more frustrating when the recipient has structural power (i.e., in the ultimatum game). The detected voice X gender effect could be attributed to the persisting discrimination against women, who, as consequence, are less affected by having their voice disregarded.
{"title":"Behavioral and Emotional Reactions to Voice Unanswered","authors":"L. Margalit, R. Suleiman, Yuval Samid","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1872168","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1872168","url":null,"abstract":"People are influenced profoundly by the extent to which they perceive social situations as fair or unfair. Numerous studies have found that people perceive procedures that allow them an opportunity to voice their opinions as fairer and as more satisfying than procedures that do not allow them such an opportunity. However, people feel more frustrated when they receive low outcomes in procedures that include voice. This phenomenon is known as the “frustration effect”. Aims: In ultimatum and dictator games with voice, we tested the recipients’ reactions to having their voice disregarded. Method: In the control condition, participants played in the role of recipient in a one-period ultimatum, or dictator game, with or without voice. In the voice condition they could also send short pre-decisional messages to the allocators. In addition, they answered a post-experimental questionnaire pertaining to their levels of satisfaction and perceptions of outcome and procedural fairness. Results: 1. In the ultimatum game rejection rates of low offers were significantly higher in the voice condition. 2. The detected effect was stronger among male participants. 3. Feelings of anger, frustration and insult were higher in the voice, than in the no-voice condition, particularly in the ultimatum game. 4. Recipients’ dissatisfaction from low offers was more pronounced in the ultimatum than in the dictator game. 5. In both games, low offers were perceived as less fair in the voice, than in the no-voice condition. Main conclusions: Our findings lend strong support to the “frustration effect”. In addition, they suggest that a “deaf ear” to voice is more frustrating when the recipient has structural power (i.e., in the ultimatum game). The detected voice X gender effect could be attributed to the persisting discrimination against women, who, as consequence, are less affected by having their voice disregarded.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121053387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Companies in dispute vary both in how systematically they consider negotiated dispute resolution and in how their legal and decision-making functions interact with each other. Approaching business conflict resolution as a professional service leads to the adoption of new agency assumptions for the study of within-party manager-lawyer relationships in conflict settings and their possible impact on the organization’s propensity to use ADR. When we consider that conflict resolution is not a task clients simply delegate to lawyers but that the two categories will actually craft response to conflict in coproduction with each other, we are able to isolate new internal barriers to conflict resolution. Based on exploratory qualitative data, this contribution explores the notion of coproduction in conflict resolution. It isolates the different lawyer-manager coproduction schemes and drafts a first list of their determinants (structural, organizational and personal). All of this aims to reflect on different ways to increase consideration for ADR in conflict resolution strategy phases, with the idea that for negotiated dispute resolution to take ground in organizations, some organizational change may prove necessary.
{"title":"Opening the Black Box of a Corporation in Dispute: Manager – Lawyer Coproduction of Response to Business Conflict","authors":"A. Borbely, Erik Wetter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1872131","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872131","url":null,"abstract":"Companies in dispute vary both in how systematically they consider negotiated dispute resolution and in how their legal and decision-making functions interact with each other. Approaching business conflict resolution as a professional service leads to the adoption of new agency assumptions for the study of within-party manager-lawyer relationships in conflict settings and their possible impact on the organization’s propensity to use ADR. When we consider that conflict resolution is not a task clients simply delegate to lawyers but that the two categories will actually craft response to conflict in coproduction with each other, we are able to isolate new internal barriers to conflict resolution. Based on exploratory qualitative data, this contribution explores the notion of coproduction in conflict resolution. It isolates the different lawyer-manager coproduction schemes and drafts a first list of their determinants (structural, organizational and personal). All of this aims to reflect on different ways to increase consideration for ADR in conflict resolution strategy phases, with the idea that for negotiated dispute resolution to take ground in organizations, some organizational change may prove necessary.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115513108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this study we present a multilevel cultural faultline model depicting the effect of faultlines in terms of national and organizational culture and personality on team conflict in offshore outsourcing teams. Some studies have addressed faultline activation, the process of triggering social categorization based on the salience of faultlines. However, faultline deactivation, the process of minimizing the salience of social categorization based on faultlines, is hardly tapped into. Therefore we introduce faultline deactivation to the concept of faultlines and include it with faultline activation to examine moderating effects. Based on an empirical study and interviews with experts, we find that the frequency of communication, as an activator, exacerbates the effects of faultline strength and that the group process of reflexivity, as a deactivator, mitigates the negative effects of faultline strength on team conflict.
{"title":"Faultline Activation and Deactivation and Their Effect on Conflict","authors":"Martijn van der Kamp, Brian Tjemkes, K. Jehn","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1866507","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1866507","url":null,"abstract":"In this study we present a multilevel cultural faultline model depicting the effect of faultlines in terms of national and organizational culture and personality on team conflict in offshore outsourcing teams. Some studies have addressed faultline activation, the process of triggering social categorization based on the salience of faultlines. However, faultline deactivation, the process of minimizing the salience of social categorization based on faultlines, is hardly tapped into. Therefore we introduce faultline deactivation to the concept of faultlines and include it with faultline activation to examine moderating effects. Based on an empirical study and interviews with experts, we find that the frequency of communication, as an activator, exacerbates the effects of faultline strength and that the group process of reflexivity, as a deactivator, mitigates the negative effects of faultline strength on team conflict.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114155079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While calling for the re-visitation of the academic discourse on the conflict in Southern Philippines, this paper explores why peace agreements resulting from mediated negotiation are not capable in ending violence in the country. In various cases, peace negotiations may actually promote an environment prone to violence. Violence remains a legitimate instrument to protect the nation’s hegemonic bureaucracy. Because violence acquires legitimacy only when it serves its purpose, the analysis of the functionality of violence becomes necessary. What happens when it ceases to fulfill its appropriated function? Charles Tilly (1985) and Hannah Arendt (2009a; 2009b) argue that the functionality of violence lies in its role in ensuring social cohesion. Tilly’s analogy of war-making and state-making implies that organized means of violence is indeed necessary in establishing national states. This paper argues that the primordial reference of framing inter-group relations promotes an environment prone to violence.The Bangsamoro question in the Philippines involves 13 Muslim ethno-linguistic groups striving for self-determination through armed insurgency in the last 40 years. It represents an interesting analytical case study to understand how violence is legitimized in the process of state (de)construction. This paper argues that the legitimization of violence moves within nation-building defined by primordial social relations. Nation-building equates the centralization of consensus-building process. Centralization as the principle that drives nation-building seeks to establish hierarchical bureaucratic structures to effectively ensure social stability. However, the same notion of system stability means subordination policies for those groups that do not meet the membership criteria formulated by the center. Groups at the periphery are exposed to the consequences of centralized decision-making: minoritization, land-grabbing, and ethnic-cleansing. The introduction of taxonomy of violence: direct, structural, and symbolical allows the understanding of the processes through which violence fulfills a purpose.Furthermore, this paper analyzes an interesting practice of the center to contain potential contenders in the periphery: divide and control. This rather new phenomenon involves the distribution of the legitimate use of violence by the Philippine State to local “political warlords” through an informal mechanism of franchising. The Philippine State has no real intention to monopolize violence, because this resignation is an outcome of a pragmatic political deliberation. Franchising violence to local political warlords and private security firms is perceived to be more appropriate. The Philippine state-building therefore involves the invalidation of the Westphalian state through the outsourcing of violence. This development, however, is an impediment to resolve the Bangsamoro question, because of the new dynamics that this practice has brought particularly to M
{"title":"The Center-Periphery Notion of Nation-Building – Franchised Violence and the Bangsamoro Question in the Philippines","authors":"A. M. Penetrante","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1872134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872134","url":null,"abstract":"While calling for the re-visitation of the academic discourse on the conflict in Southern Philippines, this paper explores why peace agreements resulting from mediated negotiation are not capable in ending violence in the country. In various cases, peace negotiations may actually promote an environment prone to violence. Violence remains a legitimate instrument to protect the nation’s hegemonic bureaucracy. Because violence acquires legitimacy only when it serves its purpose, the analysis of the functionality of violence becomes necessary. What happens when it ceases to fulfill its appropriated function? Charles Tilly (1985) and Hannah Arendt (2009a; 2009b) argue that the functionality of violence lies in its role in ensuring social cohesion. Tilly’s analogy of war-making and state-making implies that organized means of violence is indeed necessary in establishing national states. This paper argues that the primordial reference of framing inter-group relations promotes an environment prone to violence.The Bangsamoro question in the Philippines involves 13 Muslim ethno-linguistic groups striving for self-determination through armed insurgency in the last 40 years. It represents an interesting analytical case study to understand how violence is legitimized in the process of state (de)construction. This paper argues that the legitimization of violence moves within nation-building defined by primordial social relations. Nation-building equates the centralization of consensus-building process. Centralization as the principle that drives nation-building seeks to establish hierarchical bureaucratic structures to effectively ensure social stability. However, the same notion of system stability means subordination policies for those groups that do not meet the membership criteria formulated by the center. Groups at the periphery are exposed to the consequences of centralized decision-making: minoritization, land-grabbing, and ethnic-cleansing. The introduction of taxonomy of violence: direct, structural, and symbolical allows the understanding of the processes through which violence fulfills a purpose.Furthermore, this paper analyzes an interesting practice of the center to contain potential contenders in the periphery: divide and control. This rather new phenomenon involves the distribution of the legitimate use of violence by the Philippine State to local “political warlords” through an informal mechanism of franchising. The Philippine State has no real intention to monopolize violence, because this resignation is an outcome of a pragmatic political deliberation. Franchising violence to local political warlords and private security firms is perceived to be more appropriate. The Philippine state-building therefore involves the invalidation of the Westphalian state through the outsourcing of violence. This development, however, is an impediment to resolve the Bangsamoro question, because of the new dynamics that this practice has brought particularly to M","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129733979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Teamwork has advantages (e.g., coordination), but also presents challenges of interdependence (e.g., social loafing), which can make teamwork frustrating. Expressing frustration (a negative emotion) with another team member can motivate better performance, but can also backfire, triggering outcomes with serious implications for the team’s viability, such as withdrawal and reduced cooperation. We argue that how negative emotions are expressed in these contexts can mitigate the potential negative consequences for the team’s viability. In two studies (one vignette and one interactive group experiment) we investigate how expressing one’s frustration respectfully (versus rudely) triggers affective and inferential processes that differentially influence team member reactions (withdrawal, evaluations, willingness to work together) to the expresser as well as to other team members uninvolved in the dyadic emotional interaction. Our findings suggest that expressing negative emotions respectfully can convey both frustration and dissatisfaction while mitigating the potential negative consequences for team viability.
{"title":"Respectful or Rude? How Small Differences in Negative Emotional Expression Affect Individuals in Teams and Team Viability","authors":"Jennifer Carson Marr, C. Moore","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1872924","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872924","url":null,"abstract":"Teamwork has advantages (e.g., coordination), but also presents challenges of interdependence (e.g., social loafing), which can make teamwork frustrating. Expressing frustration (a negative emotion) with another team member can motivate better performance, but can also backfire, triggering outcomes with serious implications for the team’s viability, such as withdrawal and reduced cooperation. We argue that how negative emotions are expressed in these contexts can mitigate the potential negative consequences for the team’s viability. In two studies (one vignette and one interactive group experiment) we investigate how expressing one’s frustration respectfully (versus rudely) triggers affective and inferential processes that differentially influence team member reactions (withdrawal, evaluations, willingness to work together) to the expresser as well as to other team members uninvolved in the dyadic emotional interaction. Our findings suggest that expressing negative emotions respectfully can convey both frustration and dissatisfaction while mitigating the potential negative consequences for team viability.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123651017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As an international non-profit organization working in emerging democracies and post conflict countries around the world for over 12 years, Women’s Campaign International (WCI) has significant experience that demonstrates a strong link between the presence of women in leadership positions in post-conflict societies and the assurance of long-term peace. Based on WCI’s understanding that an investment in women’s leadership is essential to ensure peace and security for the future, this symposium will be devoted to an exploration of our anecdotal evidence and experiences, as well as a comprehensive review of current and growing academic literature that addresses this topic. This discussion will involve a thorough assessment of best-case practices shared among local, national, and international Civil Society and Non-Governmental Organizations as well as local and national government bodies. The objective of this symposium is to generate concrete evidence and open up dialogue about the undeniable correlation between the number of women in the decision-making process and the establishment of long-term stability and peace in post-conflict countries, through the lens of theory, policy, and practice. Three panelists will discuss the ways in which theory, policy and practice inform one another and complement each other to create sustainable change in the area of women and post conflict development. This evidence provides the basis for why governments should invest in the promotion of women’s leadership in all sectors of society. This symposium will cover five major areas in which women’s leadership contributes to peace including; civic engagement, peace keeping, community development, political processes and rule of law.
{"title":"The Connection between the Inclusion of Women and Sustainable Peace Through the Lens of Theory, Policy and Practice","authors":"Kerrie Kennedy, Deborah A. Cai","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1872928","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1872928","url":null,"abstract":"As an international non-profit organization working in emerging democracies and post conflict countries around the world for over 12 years, Women’s Campaign International (WCI) has significant experience that demonstrates a strong link between the presence of women in leadership positions in post-conflict societies and the assurance of long-term peace. Based on WCI’s understanding that an investment in women’s leadership is essential to ensure peace and security for the future, this symposium will be devoted to an exploration of our anecdotal evidence and experiences, as well as a comprehensive review of current and growing academic literature that addresses this topic. This discussion will involve a thorough assessment of best-case practices shared among local, national, and international Civil Society and Non-Governmental Organizations as well as local and national government bodies. The objective of this symposium is to generate concrete evidence and open up dialogue about the undeniable correlation between the number of women in the decision-making process and the establishment of long-term stability and peace in post-conflict countries, through the lens of theory, policy, and practice. Three panelists will discuss the ways in which theory, policy and practice inform one another and complement each other to create sustainable change in the area of women and post conflict development. This evidence provides the basis for why governments should invest in the promotion of women’s leadership in all sectors of society. This symposium will cover five major areas in which women’s leadership contributes to peace including; civic engagement, peace keeping, community development, political processes and rule of law.","PeriodicalId":193303,"journal":{"name":"IACM 2011 Istanbul Conference (Archive)","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123853066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：