Skip to main content
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1024/0044-3514.37.1.19

Zusammenfassung: In vorliegender Studie wurde die Theorie des regulatorischen Fokus (Higgins, 1997; 1998) auf den Bereich von Verhandlungen übertragen. Es wird aufgezeigt, dass Kompatibilität zwischen dem regulatorischen Fokus des Verhandelnden und dem Verhandlungsgegenstand die Präferenzen der Verhandlungspartner/innen und in Folge die Ergebnisse integrativer Verhandlungen beeinflusst. So erzielt in Verhandlungsdyaden, in denen Personen mit unterschiedlichem Fokus aufeinander treffen und sowohl prevention- als auch promotion-bezogene Verhandlungsgegenstände zu verhandeln sind, jeder Verhandlungspartner bzw. jede Verhandlungspartnerin in den jeweils fokus-kompatiblen Verhandlungsgegenständen das höhere Ergebnis. Personen im Prevention-Fokus sind stärker an wenig riskanten und verlustsicheren Verhandlungsgegenständen interessiert, während Personen im Promotion-Fokus verstärkt Interesse an Verhandlungsgegenständen bekunden, die sich durch höhere Gewinnchancen bei gleichzeitig höherem Verlustrisiko auszeichnen. Die Bedeutung des regulatorischen Fokus für Verhandlungssituationen sowie praktische Implikationen für den Verhandlungsalltag werden diskutiert.


Abstract: The present study applies regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997, 1998) to the realm of negotiations. It is demonstrated that compatibility between a negotiator's regulatory focus and a negotiation issue influences which issue is given priority by a negotiator. As a consequence, this regulatory compatibility also influences the outcome of an integrative negotiation. In the context of a two-party negotiation in which negotiators with diverging regulatory foci (promotion vs. prevention) negotiate over promotion and prevention issues, each side obtains superior results on those issues that are compatible with their regulatory focus. Negotiators with a prevention focus care more about safe negotiation issues. Negotiators with a promotion focus care more about negotiation issues that offer the chance of a higher return at the price of a higher risk. The importance of regulatory focus for negotiations is discussed on a theoretical as well as a practical level.

References

  • Aaker, J.L. , Lee, A.Y. (2001). “I” seek pleasures and “we” avoid pains: The role of self-regulatory goals in information and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 33– 49 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cesario, J. , Grant, H. , Higgins, E.T. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from “feeling right”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 388– 404 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Crowe, E. , Higgins, E.T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 117– 132 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Förster, J. , Grant, H. , Idson, L.C. , Higgins, E.T. (2001). Success/failure feedback, expectancies, and approach/avoidance motivation: How regulatory focus moderates classic relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 253– 260 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Förster, J. , Higgins, E.T. , Idson, L.C. (1998). Approach and avoidance strength during goal attainment: Regulatory focus and the “goal looms larger” effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1115– 1131 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Förster, J. , Higgins, E.T. , Taylor Bianco, A. (2003). Speed/accuracy in performance: Tradeoff in decision making or separate strategic concerns?. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 148– 164 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Förster, J. , Higgins, E.T. , Werth, L. (2004). How threat from stereotype disconfirmation triggers self-defense. Social Cognition, 22, 54– 74 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Freitas, A.L. , Liberman, N. , Higgins, E.T. (2002). Regulatory fit and resisting temptation during goal pursuit. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 291– 298 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Freitas, A.L. , Liberman, N. , Salovey, P. , Higgins, E.T. (2002). When to begin? Regulatory focus and initiating goal pursuit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 121– 130 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Froman, L.A. , Cohen, M.D. (1970). Compromise and logroll: Comparing the efficiency of two bargaining processes. Behavioral Science, 30, 180– 183 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Galinsky, A.D. , Leonardelli, G.J. , Okhuysen, G.A. , Mussweiler, T. (2005). Regulatory focus at the bargaining table: Promoting distributive and integrative success. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1– 12 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E.T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280– 1300 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E.T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 1-46). New York: Academic Press . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E.T. , Bond, R.N. , Klein, R. , Strauman, T. (1986). Self-discrepancies and emotional vulnerability: How magnitude, accessibility, and type of discrepancy influence affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 5– 15 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E.T. , Grant, H. , Shah, J. (1999). Self-regulation and quality of life: Emotional and non-emotional life experiences. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 244-266). New York: Russell Sage . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E.T. , Idson, L.C. , Freitas, A.L. , Spiegel, S. , Molden, D.C. (2003). Transfer of value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1140– 1153 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E.T. , Roney, C. , Crowe, E. , Hymes, C. (1994). Ideal versus ought predilections for approach and avoidance: Distinct self-regulatory systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 276– 286 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, A.Y. , Aaker, J.L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 205– 218 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Liberman, N. , Idson, L.C. , Camacho, C.J. , Higgins, E.T. (1999). Promotion and prevention choices between stability and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1135– 1145 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Neale, M.A. , Northcraft, G.B. (1986). Experts, amateurs, and refrigerators: Comparing expert and amateur negotiators in a novel task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 305– 317 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pham, M.T. , Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 503– 518 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pruitt, D.G. (1981). Negotiation behavior . New York: Academic Press . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Safer, D.A. (1998). Preference for luxurious or reliable products. Promotion and prevention-focus as moderators . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Thompson, L.L. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 515– 532 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Thompson, L.L. (1998). . Dispute Resolution Research Center (DRRC), Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Thompson, L.L. (2001). The mind and heart of the negotiator (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tripp, T.M. , Sondak, H. (1992). An evaluation of dependent variables in experimental negotiation studies: Impasse rates and Pareto efficiency. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 273– 295 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Werth, L. , Förster, J. (2004). The effects of regulatory focus on braking speed . Manuscript submitted for publication . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Werth, L. , Förster, J. (2005). The influence of the regulatory focus on consumer behaviour . Manuscript submitted for publication . First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • White, S.B. , Neale, M.A. (1994). The role of negotiator aspirations and settlement expectancies in bargaining outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 303– 317 . First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar