Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:04:51.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Ren Qing” versus the ‘Big Five’ The Role of Culturally Sensitive Measures of Individual Difference in Distributive Negotiations

Part of: Cross Cultural Collection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Leigh Anne Liu ,
Raymond A. Friedman  and
Shu-cheng Chi
Raymond A. Friedman
Affiliation:
Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University, USA
Shu-cheng Chi
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this study, we examine culture-specific relationships between individual differences and distributive negotiations. We measured individual characteristics and their effects on distributive negotiations in both American and Chinese cultures, using a Western-based scale (the ‘Big Five’) and a Chinese-based scale (CPAI). We found that agreeableness and extraversion (from the ‘Big Five’) affected negotiations for Americans, but not for Chinese. We found that harmony, face and Ren Qing (from the Chinese-based scales) affected negotiations for Chinese, but not for Americans. Specifically, we found that in the American culture, those higher in extraversion and agreeableness achieved lower economic gain, whereas in the Chinese context that those high in harmony, face, and Ren Qing were more likely to be influenced by opening offers and achieve lower economic gain in distributive negotiations. Our study highlights the need to examine negotiations using culturally sensitive constructs and measures.

Type
Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , July 2005 , pp. 225 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2005

References

Adair, W. L., Okumura, T. and Brett, J. M. (2001). ‘Negotiation behavior when cultures collide: The United States and Japan’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 371–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Axelrod, R. (1976). Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barrick, M. R. and Mount, M. K. (1991). ‘The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis’. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K. and Stewart, G. L. (1998). ‘Five-factor model of personality and performance in jobs involving interpersonal interactions’. Human Performance, 11, 2–3, 145–65.Google Scholar
Barry, B. and Friedman, R. A. (1998). ‘Bargainer characteristics in distributive and integrative negotiation’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 345–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, M. H. (accessed 2001). Chinese Vernon of NEO-PI-R. Odessa, FL, Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Bond, M. H. and Forgas, J. P. (1984). ‘Linking person perception to behavior intention across cultures: The role of cultural collectivism’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15, 337–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, D. (1968). ‘The nature of group cohesiveness’, in Cartwright, D. and Zander, A. (Eds), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (3rd edn) New York: Harper & Row, (pp. 91–109.)Google Scholar
Cheung, E M., Leung, K., Fan, R. M., Song, W. Z., Zhang, J. X. and Zhang, J. P. (1996). ‘Development of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J. X., Sun, H. F., Gan, Y. Q., Song, W. Z. and Xie, D. (2001). ‘Indigenous Chinese personality constructs: Is the five-factor model complete’? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chow, C. W., Deng, F.J. and Ho, J. L. (2000). ‘The openness of knowledge sharing within organizations: A comparative study of the United States and the People's Republic of China’. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 12, 65–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: Science and Practice (3rd edn). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. and Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr. and McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO Personality Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Dutton, J. E. and Dukerich, J. M. (1991). ‘Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation’. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 517–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earley, P. C. (1989). ‘Social loafing and collectivism: A comparison of the United States and the People's Republic of China’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 565–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earley, P. C. (1997). Face, Harmony, and Social Structure: An Analysis of Organizational Behavior across Cultures. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erez, M. and Earley, P. C. (1987). ‘Comparative analysis of goal-setting strategies across cultures’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 658–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabrielidis, C, Stephan, W. G., Yabarra, O., Dos Santos Pearson, V M. and Villareal, L. (1997). ‘Preferred styles of conflict resolution’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 661–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galinsky, A. D., Seiden, V., Kim, P. H. and Medvec, V. H. (2002). ‘The dissatisfaction of having your first offer accepted: The role of counterfactual thinking in negotiations’. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 271–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galinsky, A. D. and Mussweiler, T. (2001). ‘First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 657–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelfand, M.J. and Christakopoulou, S. (1999). ‘Culture and negotiator cognition: Judgment accuracy and negotiation processes in individualistic and collectivistic cultures’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79, 248–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelfand, M.J. and Realo, A. (1999). ‘Individualism-collectivism and accountability in intergroup negotiations’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 721–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, M.J., Nishii, L. H., Holcombe, K. M., Dyer, N., Ohbuchi, K. I. and Fukuno, M. (2001). ‘Cultural influences on cognitive representations of conflict: Interpretations of conflict episodes in the United States and Japan’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 6, 1059–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). ‘The development of markers of the Big-Five factor structure’. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). ‘A broad bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models’. In Mervielde, I., Deary, L, De Fruyt, F., and Ostendorf, F. (Eds.) Personality Psychology in Europe, Vol. 7. Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press (7–28).Google Scholar
Graham, J. L. and Lam, N. M. (2003). ‘The Chinese negotiation’. Harvard Business Review, 81, 10, 82–91.Google ScholarPubMed
Graham, J. L., Mintu, A. T. and Rogers, W. (1994). ‘Explorations of negotiation behaviors in ten foreign countries using a model developed in the United States’. Management Science, 40, 72–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1993). ‘Cultural constraints in management theories’. Academy of Management Executives, 7, 1, 81–94.Google Scholar
Jehn, K. A. and Weldon, E. (1997). ‘Managerial attitudes toward conflict: Cross-cultural differences in resolution styles’. Journal of International Management, 3, 291–321.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Hies, R. and Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). ‘Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 4, 765–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keesing, R. (1974). ‘Theories of culture’. Annual Review of Anthropology, 3, 73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristensen, H. and Gaerling, T. (1997). ‘The effects of anchor points and reference points on negotiation process and outcome’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71, 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, H. R. and Kitayama, S. (1998). ‘The cultural psychology of personality’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCrae, R. R. and Costa, P. T. Jr. (1997). ‘Personality trait structure as a human universal’. American Psychologist, 52, 509–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, M. W., Willians, K. Y., Leung, K., Larrick, R., Mendoza, M. T., Bhatnagar, D., Li, J., Kondo, M., Luo, J. L. and Hu, J. C. (1998). ‘Conflict management style: Accounting for cross-national differences’. Journal of International Business Studies, 29, 729–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mortenson, S. T. (2002). ‘Sex, communication values, and cultural values: Individualism-collectivism as a mediator of sex differences in communication values in two cultures’. Communication Reports, 15, 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neale, M. A. and Bazerman, M. H. (1999). ‘Negotiating rationally: The power and impact of the negotiator's frame’. In Lewicki, R.J. and Saunders, D. M. (Eds), Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases (3rd edn) Boston, MA: Irwin/The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., (pp. 149–59).Google Scholar
Schlenker, B. R. and Weigold, M. F. (1992). ‘Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management’. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 133–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). ‘Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values’. In Kim, U. and Triandis, H. C. (Eds), Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Methods, and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sebenius, J. K. (1993). Mapletech-Yazawa. Harvard Program on Negotiation Clearinghouse. Used with permission.Google Scholar
Siegel, S, and Fouraker, L. E. (1960). Bargaining and Group Decision Making: Experiments in Bilateral Monopoly. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R.J. and Soriano, L.J. (1984). ‘Styles of conflict resolution’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 115–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, L. (1998). Heart and Mind of the Negotiators. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Ting Toomey, S. (1988). ‘Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory’. In Kim, Y. Y. and Gudykunst, W. B. (Eds), Theories in Intercultural Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Tinsley, C. H. (1998). ‘Models of conflict resolution in Japanese, German, and American cultures’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 316–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tinsley, C. H. (2001). ‘How negotiators get to yes: Predicting the constellation of strategies used across cultures to negotiate conflict’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 583–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Triandis, H. C., Carnevale, P., Gelfand, M., Robert, C., Wasti, S. A., Probst, T., Kashima, E. S., Dragonas, T., Chan, D., Chen, X. P., Kim, U., de Dreu, C., van de Vliert, E., Iwao, S., Ohbuchi, K. I. and Schmitz, P. (2001). ‘Culture and deception in business negotiations: A multilevel analysis’. International Journal of Cross Cultured Management, 1, 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, R. E. and McKersie, R. B. (1965). A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K. and Sokolowska, J. (1998). ‘What folklore tells us about risk and risk taking: Cross-cultural comparison of American, German, and Chinese proverbs’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 170–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J. X. and Bond, M. H. (1998). ‘Personality and filial piety among college students in two Chinese societies: The added value indigenous constructs’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 402–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar