Abstract
Increasing attention in channel management is devoted to the power shift in the supply chains. Several
studies focus on the reasons for the power shift rather than highlighting the consequences for the manufacturer-
retailer relationship. A mutual benefit will be achieved by implementing formal procedures in
real-life negotiations to improve the results. Our study relies on a modified Issue Authority procedure.
Previous empirical studies report women as being less effective negotiators than men. We combine both
research fields and analyze how to overcome obstacles if negotiators stick strictly to their utility-based
procedures.
In our experiment with 72 negotiators, we consider the influence of gender in the light of bargaining power
and assess efficiency achieved by utilizing the modified Issue Authority procedure. Differences in power
allocation turn out to have a significant impact on negotiation success. In scenarios with substantial
differences in bargaining power, particularly female and mixed dyads failed to achieve a mutually satisfactory
result.
We learn that female negotiators rely on their bargaining power, rather than systematically improving
mutual utilities whereas male dyads negotiate on a consistently high, but still inefficient level. In the light
of these differences, we argue that bargaining power does not compensate for insufficient negotiation
skills or efforts. On the contrary, unbalanced bargaining power decreases the likelihood of success.
Users
Please
log in to take part in the discussion (add own reviews or comments).