Paying a price: culture, trust, and negotiation consequences

Three studies contrasting Indian and American negotiators tested hypotheses derived from theory proposing why there are cultural differences in trust and how cultural differences in trust influence negotiation strategy. Study 1 (a survey) documented that Indian negotiators trust their counterparts less than American negotiators. Study 2 (a negotiation simulation) linked American and Indian negotiators' self-reported trust and strategy to their insight and joint gains. Study 3 replicated and extended Study 2 using independently coded negotiation strategy data, allowing for stronger causal inference. Overall, the strategy associated with Indian negotiators' reluctance to extend interpersonal (as opposed to institutional) trust produced relatively poor outcomes. Our data support an expanded theoretical model of negotiation, linking culture to trust, strategies, and outcomes.     

Exploring how constraints created by other people influence intraindividual variation in objective performance measures

Objective performance indicators have low test-retest reliability, particularly in complex jobs. Yet, little is actually known about the reasons why objective performance indicators lack temporal stability. The authors address this issue by using data from a sample of 106 professional football players to explore how the actions of other people influence intraindividual variation in performance. Results suggest that weekly measures of performance outcome exhibit substantial variability within individuals. A significant portion of this within-person variance is explained by environmental fluctuation created by the constraining actions of other people. Individuals with highly fluctuating past performance exhibit stronger relationships between the actions of competitors and subsequent performance outcomes. The intraindividual relationship between fluctuating constraints and performance outcomes is also stronger for individuals in more complex jobs.