Who Am I Faced With?: The Influence of Gender-professional Identity Integration (G-PII) and Sex of Opposing Negotiator on Female Businesspersons’ Negotiations

• Main Author: TAN, Yi Wen
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2014
• Subjects: gender-professional identity integration; negotiation; female businesspersons; Social Psychology
• Online Access: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/etd_coll/112; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=etd_coll
• Institution: Singapore Management University

Previous research examining sex differences in negotiation revealed conflicting evidence for its presence. This could be due to the lack of consideration of having a business identity on top of having a gender identity. This suggests the importance of examining how female businesspersons integrate their female and business identities using the construct of gender-professional identity integration (G-PII). The purpose of Study 1 was to develop a measure for G-PII by adapting and validating from existing items from past bicultural identity integration research. A 15-item measure with two factors (distance and conflict) emerged. Study 2 investigated how the sex of the opposing negotiator influenced female businesspersons’ negotiation behavior. Based on the theory of identity frame switching, an interaction between G-PII and the sex of the opposing negotiator was proposed. It was hypothesized that when female businesspersons are faced with a male opposing negotiator, those with high G-PII assimilate towards the business identity cue and are more aggressive than those with low G-PII who contrast against the business identity cue. When faced with a female opposing negotiator, the reverse should be true. Study 2A and 2B examined the hypothesized interaction effect using two different methodologies. The findings showed that the conflict factor in the G-PII scale interacted with the sex of the opposing negotiator to influence female businesspersons’ decision to accept counteroffers (Study 2A) and to make first offers (Study 2B). Theoretical and practical implications of this study are discussed.