ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Article
Purchase PDF (147 K)

Article Toolbox
 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
View Record in Scopus
 
doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2007.02.003    
How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)

Copyright © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: Strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomesstar, open

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

William W. Madduxa, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author, Elizabeth Mullenb and Adam D. Galinskyc

aINSEAD, Organisational Behaviour Area, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France

bStanford University, USA

cNorthwestern University, USA


Received 7 July 2006; 
revised 12 February 2007. 
Communicated by Hart Blanton. 
Available online 24 February 2007.

Abstract

Two experiments investigated the hypothesis that strategic behavioral mimicry can facilitate negotiation outcomes. Study 1 used an employment negotiation with multiple issues, and demonstrated that strategic behavioral mimicry facilitated outcomes at both the individual and dyadic levels: Negotiators who mimicked the mannerisms of their opponents both secured better individual outcomes, and their dyads as a whole also performed better when mimicking occurred compared to when it did not. Thus, mimickers created more value and then claimed most of that additional value for themselves, though not at the expense of their opponents. In Study 2, mimicry facilitated negotiators’ ability to uncover underlying compatible interests and increased the likelihood of obtaining a deal in a negotiation where a prima facie solution was not possible. Results from Study 2 also demonstrated that interpersonal trust mediated the relationship between mimicry and deal-making. Implications for our understanding of negotiation dynamics and interpersonal coordination are discussed.

Keywords: Mimicry; Negotiations; Conflict resolution; Interpersonal behavior; Decision-making; Automaticity

Article Outline

Study 1
Method
Participants
Negotiation task
Procedure
Experimental manipulations
Manipulation checks and dependent measures
Results
Manipulation checks
Joint gain
Individual gain
Study 2
Overview
Method
Participants
Procedure
Experimental manipulations
Outcome measure
Post-negotiation measures
Results
Manipulation checks
Performance
The mediating role of trust
General discussion
References


star, openThis research was supported by the Dispute Resolution Research Center at the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, and was facilitated by National Science Foundation Grant SES-0530380 to Elizabeth Mullen. We thank Hart Blanton, Kris Preacher, Chris Bauman, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Thanks also to Vanessa Hsieh for her help with data entry.


Corresponding Author Contact InformationCorresponding author. Fax: +33 1 6074 6169.

 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.