谈判中相对谈判实力对不道德谈判策略的影响*

尚哲; 左臣惠; 王崇锋; 马力

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250114

PDF(1964 KB)

心理科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (1) : 140-152. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250114

社会、人格与管理

谈判中相对谈判实力对不道德谈判策略的影响^*

尚哲¹, 左臣惠¹, 王崇锋^**2, 马力^**3

作者信息 +

The Influence of Relative Bargaining Power on Unethical Negotiation Strategy in Political-Enterprise Negotiations

Shang Zhe¹, Zuo Chenhui¹, Wang Chongfeng², Ma Li³

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

为探究谈判中相对谈判实力对双方采用不道德谈判策略的影响,同时关注谈判个体的刺激性风险寻求在上述机制中发挥的调节效应,对572名被试进行行为实验。结果发现,谈判角色与相对谈判实力共同对不道德谈判策略中的竞争性讨价还价策略、攻击对手的人际网络策略与不正当信息收集策略产生影响。企业在相对谈判实力强时会更多采取竞争性讨价还价策略和攻击对手人际网络策略;政府在相对谈判实力强时会更多采取竞争性讨价还价策略,在相对谈判实力弱时反而会更多采取不正当信息收集策略。谈判角色与相对谈判实力并未对虚假承诺以及误传信息策略产生影响。刺激性风险寻求增强了双方相对谈判实力对攻击对手人际网络策略的影响,但并未强化相对谈判实力与其他类型不道德谈判策略的关系。研究发现有助于了解谈判中相对谈判实力对双方不道德谈判策略选择的影响及边界条件,为双方更有效、公平的谈判实践提供理论指导。

Abstract

Negotiation, as one of the common means of reaching an agreement in government-enterprise cooperation, is a process in which two or more parties seek appropriate ways to resolve conflicts and achieve goals. However, due to different levels of mastery of information, the demand for resources, and the existence of other conditions, the power of the negotiating parties is not always equal. In China, the same applies to the bargaining power of the government and enterprises. Previous studies have shown that the bargaining power affects the choice of negotiating strategies. Accordingly, this study proposes that negotiating subjects with strong bargaining power will engage in more unethical negotiation tactics, such as traditional competitive bargaining, attacking an opponent's network, false promises, misrepresentation, and inappropriate information gathering. This study investigates the effect of bargaining power on the use of unethical negotiation tactics by both political and enterprise negotiators in government-enterprise negotiations. It explores the role of stimulating risk-seeking preferences by negotiators in the relationship between bargaining power and unethical negotiation tactics.
There were 572 participants in behavioral experiments (between-subject design) of this study. Firstly, the bargaining power (high vs. low) was manipulated using the situational framing material. Then, the Self-reported Inappropriate Negotiation Strategies Scale (SINS) and the Stimulating Risk-Taking Scale (SRT) were used to measure participants’ choice of unethical negotiation tactics, and their stimulating risk-taking preferences. This study tested the hypotheses using IBM SPSS Statistics 23 software and ANOVA analysis. Prior to analysis, this study virtually assigned the variables (negotiation role: government = 1, enterprise = 2; bargaining power: the government has more negotiating power = 1, the enterprise has more negotiating power = 2). Specifically, the two-way ANOVA analysis and simple effect analysis were first performed to investigate whether the use of unethical negotiation tactics, including traditional competitive bargaining, attacking an opponent's network, false promises, misrepresentation, and inappropriate information gathering, is differentiated by negotiation role, bargaining power, and the interaction of both. Three-way ANOVA analysis and simple effect analysis were then used to test the moderated effect of stimulus risk-taking. Group setting dummy variables (stimulus risk-taking was first ranked and then coded according to 27% of the ranking results) were performed for stimulus risk-taking (low(the first 27%) = -1, high(the last 27%) = 1). The results showed that: (1) Enterprise negotiators with strong bargaining power are more likely to adopt the traditional competitive bargaining strategy and to attack an opponent's network strategy. (2) Government negotiators with strong bargaining power are more likely to adopt a traditional competitive bargaining strategy but less likely to use an inappropriate information gathering strategy. (3) Bargaining power and the role of the negotiator have no interaction effect on false promises, or misrepresentation. (4) The stimulated risk-taking preference of the negotiator regulates the relation between government-enterprise relative bargaining power and attacking an opponent's network. Under the highly stimulated risk-seeking preference, the interaction of negotiation role and bargaining power has an increased positive effect on attacking an opponent's network.
The government-enterprise relationship is a key aspect of promoting China's rapid economic development. The cooperation between the government and enterprises will be further strengthened. As a means in the construction of government-enterprise cooperation, the negotiation will appear frequently, and its results will have a certain impact on social and economic development. The current study explored the mechanisms between bargaining power, negotiation role, and unethical negotiation tactics. It revealed the important role of individual character in stimulus risk-taking preferences in the above relation. This study enriched the literature on micro-research in the fields of government and enterprise negotiation. The findings can provide theoretical guidelines for more effective and fair government-business negotiations. It is of great significance to promote the success of the negotiations and form government-enterprise cooperation.

导出引用

尚哲, 左臣惠, 王崇锋, 马力. 谈判中相对谈判实力对不道德谈判策略的影响^*[J]. 心理科学. 2025, 48(1): 140-152 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250114

Shang Zhe, Zuo Chenhui, Wang Chongfeng, Ma Li. The Influence of Relative Bargaining Power on Unethical Negotiation Strategy in Political-Enterprise Negotiations[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2025, 48(1): 140-152 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250114

参考文献

[1] 边燕杰, 张磊. (2013). 论关系文化与关系社会资本. 人文杂志, 1, 107-113.
[2] 戴海琦. (2015). 心理测量学. 高等教育出版社..
[3] 郭庆旺, 贾俊雪. (2006). 地方政府行为、投资冲动与宏观经济稳定. 管理世界, 5, 19-25.
[4] 何艳玲, 李丹. (2020). 扭曲或退出: 城市水务PPP中的政企合作关系转换. 公共管理学报, 17(3), 62-73, 169.
[5] 李岩梅, 刘长江, 李纾. (2007). 认知、动机、情感因素对谈判行为的影响. 心理科学进展, 15(3), 511-517.
[6] 王敏, 程源. (2016). 谈判者的情绪风格对谈判的影响研究回顾. 管理现代化, 36(1), 89-92.
[7] 王敏, 韩玉兰. (2017). 个体特征在权力不均衡谈判中的影响. 经济科学, 2, 116-128.
[8] 王涛. (2007). 跨国公司与东道国政府的关系——讨价还价、控制与合作. 理论导刊, 10, 121-123.
[9] 王天义. (2016). PPP对政企关系的界定. 中国金融, 19, 82-83.
[10] 王欣. (2022). 耦合型政企关系的理论建构与中国政企关系的优化方向. 西安交通大学学报(社会科学版), 42(6), 21-30.
[11] 夏立明, 王丝丝, 张成宝. (2017). PPP项目再谈判过程的影响因素内在逻辑研究——基于扎根理论. 软科学, 31(1), 136-140.
[12] 张志学, 姚晶晶, 黄鸣鹏. (2013). 和谐动机与整合性谈判结果. 心理学报, 45(9), 1026-1038.
[13] 周黎安. (2017). 转型中的地方政府: 官员激励与治理.上海人民出版社.
[14] Al-Khatib J., Malshe A., Sailors J. J., & Clark III I. (2011). The impact of deceitful tendencies, relativism and opportunism on negotiation tactics: A comparative study of US and Belgian managers. European Journal of Marketing, 45(1-2), 133-152.
[15] Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511-536.
[16] Awosola, R. K., & Aghemelo, A. T. (2020). Negotiation and negotiating behaviours: The role of personality variables. Scholedge International Journal of Management and Development, 7(11), 161-168.
[17] Banai M., Stefanidis A., Shetach A., & Özbek M. F. (2014). Attitudes toward ethically questionable negotiation tactics: A two-country study. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(4), 669-685.
[18] Boles T. L., Croson R. T. A., & Murnighan J. K. (2000). Deception and retribution in repeated ultimatum bargaining. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(2), 235-259.
[19] Brett, J., & Thompson, L. (2016). Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 68-79.
[20] Caputo A., Borbely A., & Dabic M. (2019a). Building theory on the negotiation capability of the firm: Evidence from Ryanair. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(2), 240-262.
[21] Caputo A., Ayoko O. B., Amoo N., & Menke C. (2019b). The relationship between cultural values, cultural intelligence and negotiation styles. Journal of Business Research, 99, 23-36.
[22] Chuah S. H., Hoffmann R., & Larner J. (2014). Chinese values and negotiation behaviour: A bargaining experiment. International Business Review, 23(6), 1203-1211.
[23] Cohen, T. R. (2010). Moral emotions and unethical bargaining: The differential effects of empathy and perspective taking in deterring deceitful negotiation. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(4), 569-579.
[24] Crott H., Kayser E., & Lamm H. (1980). The effects of information exchange and communication in an asymmetrical negotiation situation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 10(2), 149-163.
[25] De Dreu C. K., Weingart L. R., & Kwon S. (2000). Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: A meta-analytic review and test of two theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 889-905.
[26] Dugan R., Rouziou M., & Bolander W. (2020). The case for hiring neurotic salespeople: A longitudinal growth modeling analysis. Journal of Business Research, 116, 123-136.
[27] Fast N. J., Sivanathan N., Mayer N. D., & Galinsky A. D. (2021). Power and overconfident decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(2), 249-260.
[28] Fousiani K., De Jonge, K. M. M., & Michelakis G. (2022). Having no negotiation power does not matter as long as you can think creatively: The moderating role of age. International Journal of Conflict Management, 33(5), 956-990.
[29] Frieden, J., & Walter, S. (2019). Analyzing inter-state negotiations in the Eurozone crisis and beyond. European Union Politics, 20(1), 134-151.
[30] Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H, & Magee, J. C. (2013). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453-466.
[31] Galinsky, A. D., Schaerer, M. & Magee, J. C. (2017). The four horsemen of power at the bargaining table. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 32(4), 606-611.
[32] Gaspar, J. P., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2021). Confident and cunning: Negotiator self-efficacy promotes deception in negotiations. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(1), 139-155.
[33] Getz, K. A., & Volkema, R. J. (2001). Culture, perceived corruption, and economics: A model of predictors and outcomes. Business and Society, 40(1), 7-30.
[34] Gruenfeld D. H., Inesi M. E., Magee J. C., Galinsky A. D. (2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 111-127.
[35] Gunia B. C., Brett J. M., Nandkeolyar A. K., & Kamdar D. (2011). Paying a price: Culture, trust, and negotiation consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 774-789.
[36] Hair J. F., Black W. C., Babin B. J., Anderson R. E., & Tatham R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall.
[37] Husted, B. W. (1999). A critique of the empirical methods of integrative social contracts theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(3), 227-235.
[38] Kang, P. (2022). Insincere negotiations: How negotiators can misrepresent their objectives to exploit counterparts during and after negotiations. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, Article 101409.
[39] Kray, L. J., & Haselhuhn, M. P. (2012). Male pragmatism in negotiators' ethical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(5), 1124-1131.
[40] Larrick R. P., Heath C., & Wu G. (2009). Goal-induced risk taking in negotiation and decision making. Social Cognition, 27(3), 342-364.
[41] Lewicki, R. J., & Robinson, R. J. (1998). Ethical and unethical bargaining tactics: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(6), 665-682.
[42] Liu X. Y., Ma Z. Z., Liang D. P. (2019). Personality effects on the endorsement of ethically questionable negotiation strategies: Business ethics in Canada and China. Sustainability, 11(11), Article 3097.
[43] Lu W. X., Wei Y. X., & Wang R. (2020). Handling inter-organisational conflict based on bargaining power: Organisational power distance orientation matters. International Journal of Conflict Management, 31(5), 781-800.
[44] Ma L., & Parks J. M., (2012). Your good name: The relationship between perceived reputational risk and acceptability of negotiation tactics. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(2), 161-175.
[45] Ma A. Y., Yang Y., & Savani K. (2019). "Take it or leave it!" a choice mindset leads to greater persistence and better outcomes in negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 153, 1-12.
[46] Makarowski, R. (2013). The stimulating and instrumental risk questionnaire-motivation in sport. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 13(2), 135-139.
[47] Malhotra, D., & Gino, F. (2011). The pursuit of power corrupts: How investing in outside options motivates opportunism in relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(4), 559-592.
[48] Miles, E. W., & Clenney, E. F. (2010). Gender differences in negotiation: A status characteristics theory view. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 3(2), 130-144.
[49] Mishra, S., & Lalumière, M. L. (2011). Individual differences in risk-propensity: Associations between personality and behavioral measures of risk. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(6), 869-873.
[50] Muda R., Kicia M., Michalak-Wojnowska M., Ginszt M., Filip A., Gawda P., & Majcher P. (2018). The dopamine receptor D4 Gene (DRD4) and financial risk-taking: Stimulating and instrumental risk-taking propensity and motivation to engage in investment activity. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 12, Article 34.
[51] Neville, L., & Fisk, G. M. (2019). Getting to excess: Psychological entitlement and negotiation attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34(4), 555-574.
[52] Nohe C., Hüffmeier J., Bürkner P., Mazei J., Sondern D., Runte A., & Hertel G. (2022). Unethical choice in negotiations: A meta-analysis on gender differences and their moderators. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 173, Article 104189.
[53] Ogden, J. S. (2018). When do negotiation tactics become unethical? Honesty in reframing. Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, 10, 98-113.
[54] Ohiomah A., Benyoucef M., & Andreev P. (2020). A multidimensional perspective of business-to-business sales success: A meta-analytic review. Industrial Marketing Management, 90, 435-452.
[55] Rivers, C., & Volkema, R. (2013). East-west differences in “tricky” tactics: A comparison of the tactical preferences of Chinese and Australian negotiators. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1), 17-31.
[56] Robinson R. J., Lewicki R. J., & Donahue E. M. (2000). Extending and testing a five factor model of ethical and unethical bargaining tactics: Introducing the SINS scale. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(6), 649-664.
[57] Rzeszutek M., Szyszka A., & Okoń S. (2023). Personality and risk-perception profiles with regard to subjective wellbeing and company management: Corporate managers during the covid-19 pandemic. The Journal of Psychology, 157(5), 297-317.
[58] Schaerer M., Swaab R. I., & Galinsky A. D. (2015). Anchors weigh more than power: Why absolute powerlessness liberates negotiators to achieve better outcomes. Psychological Science, 26(2), 170-181.
[59] Schaerer M., Teo L., Madan N., & Swaab R. I. (2020). Power and negotiation: Review of current evidence and future directions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 47-51.
[60] Schweitzer M. E., Hershey J. C., & Bradlow E. T. (2006). Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(1), 1-19.
[61] Schweitzer M. E., Ordóñez L., & Douma B. (2004). Goal setting as a motivator of unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 422-432.
[62] Sharma S., Bottom W. P., & Elfenbein H. A. (2013). On the role of personality, cognitive ability, and emotional intelligence in predicting negotiation outcomes: A meta-analysis. Organizational Psychology Review, 3(4), 293-336.
[63] Shirokova G., Osiyevskyy O., Bogatyreva K. (2016). Exploring the intention-behavior link in student entrepreneurship: Moderating effects of individual and environmental characteristics. European Management Journal, 34(4), 386-399.
[64] Skandrani H., Fessi L., & Ladhari R. (2021). The impact of the negotiators' personality and socio-demographic factors on their perception of unethical negotiation tactics. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 28(2), 169-185.
[65] Sobral F., Tavares G. M., Furtado L., Lagowska U., & Neto J. A. (2022). Deceitful when insecure: The effect of self-efficacy beliefs on the use of deception in negotiations. Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility, 32(1), 179-190
[66] Stefanidis A., Banai M., Schinzel U., & Erkuş A. (2021). Ethically questionable negotiation tactics: The differential roles of national, societal and individual cultural values. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 28(3), 626-656.
[67] Thompson L. L., Wang J., & Gunia B. C. (2010). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 61(1), 491-515.
[68] Tost, L. P. (2015). When, why, and how do powerholders “feel the power”? Examining the links between structural and psychological power and reviving the connection between power and responsibility. Research in Organizational Behavior, 35, 29-56.
[69] Traczyk J., Sobkow A., & Zaleskiewicz T. (2015). Affect-laden imagery and risk taking: The mediating role of stress and risk perception. PLoS one, 10(3), Article e0122226.
[70] Ursachi G., Horodnic I. A., & Zait A. (2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679-686.
[71] Whyte, G., & Sebenius, J. K. (1997). The effect of multiple anchors on anchoring in individual and group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(1), 75-85.
[72] Yang Y., De Cremer D., & Wang C. (2017). How ethically would Americans and Chinese negotiate? The effect of intra-cultural versus inter-cultural negotiations. Journal of Business Ethics, 145(3), 659-670.
[73] Zahariadis, N. (2017). Bargaining power and negotiation strategy: Examining the Greek bailouts, 2010-2015. Journal of European Public Policy, 24(5), 675-694.
[74] Zaleskiewicz, T. (2001). Beyond risk seeking and risk aversion: Personality and the dual nature of economic risk taking. European Journal of Personality, 15(1), S105-S122.
[75] Zalma A. R., Safiah M. Y., Ajau D., & Khairil Anuar, M. I. (2015). Reliability and validity of television food advertising questionnaire in Malaysia. Health Promotion International, 30(3), 523-530.