No abstract

The effects of trust (denned as belief that the other negotiator is cooperatively motivated), aspirations, and gender were investigated in a study of the conditions and processes leading to outcomes that jointly benefit bath parties. Under high aspirations, high trust produced self-consciously cooperative behavior, in the form of direct information exchange; low trust produced self-consciously distributive (competitive) behavior and one form of indirect information exchange. A correlational analysis showed that joint benefit was a positive function of a set of trial and error tactics and two forms of indirect information exchange, a negative function of the use of distributive tactics, and unrelated to direct information exchange. Joint benefit was greater under higher aspirations but was not a function of trust or the interaction between trust and aspirations. Results were similar for both genders except that women engaged in less distributive behavior and were less interested in the task, especially under high aspirations. A theory of strategic choice is presented to explain the major experimental findings.Negotiation can be denned as symbolic communication between two or more parties aimed at reaching agreement on an issue where there are initial differences in preference. The present study grew out of a research program on the processes by which two negotiators locate and adopt options that satisfy (i.e., "integrate") their collective needs and hence produce agreements of high joint benefit. This topic has been referred to as "integration" (Follett, 1940) or "integrative bargaining" (Pruitt & Lewis, 1977;Walton & McKersie, 1965).

No abstract

DISTRIBUTION: This report has been cleared for release to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) to comply with regulatory requirements. It has been given no primary distribution other than to DTIC and will be available only through DTIC or the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). FINAL DISPOSITION: This report may be destroyed when it is no longer needed. Please do not return it to the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. NOTE: The views, opinions, and findings in this report are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy, or decision, unless so designated by other authorized documents.

To compile and organize the existing literature on senior leadership skills and functions. Procedure: Literature on senior leadership was compiled through library searches and consultations with leadership/management experts from academia, industry and the military. Published and unpublished manuscripts were reviewed for their relevance to the required functions and competencies of effective senior leaders at the colonel and general offices level. The most relevant contributions were abstracted and organized into three sections: Summary Literature (i.e. manuscripts providing a general overview of the field); Empirical Literature (i.e. research-based contributions); and Nonempirical Literature (i.e. a representative sample of theories and personal opinion essays). Within the sections each reference was classified according to its content area on three dimensions: "Organization Type" (military, nonmilitary or military-nonmilitary comparisons): "Target Population" (senior leaders or level-comparisons): and "Subject Matter" (senior leader competencies and/or job related variables). Findings: (1) Of the 135 contributions abstracted, 28 items summarized the existing literature, 64 were research-based, and 43 were theoretical or personal opinion essays. (2) Twenty-five items focused on military leadership, 98 dealt with the industrial/private sector and 12 involved comparisons between the two. (3) One hundred twenty four items dealt specifically with senior leadership. The remaining 11 dealt with general theoretical issues.