The main aim of this paper is to analyze the effect of gender differences on negotiation behaviour choice and, consequently, on its outcome. The analysis undertaken is first defined by distinguishing between sex and gender role. It gender role and not biological sex the factor that can have a direct impact on behaviour. With a contextual perspective, we have chosen the negotiation processes of strategic alliances as our contextual framework of analysis.
The paper adopts a qualitative methodology, particularly case study analysis.
A higher degree of complexity increases the perception of ambiguity, which then leads to the influence of gender in the negotiation. Androgynous profiles act favourably in nurturing clearly integrative behaviour, whilst when the profile more closely resembles the masculine stereotype, behaviour tends to be more competitive, though attenuated. Acting in the best interests of the firm, and the fact that negotiators normally belong to the higher echelons of management, favours the adoption of this integrative behaviour. Lastly, it can be observed that competitive behaviour results in less favourable outcomes than an integrative approach in a cooperation agreement.
The proposal bring to the attention of managers the importance of choosing the individuals that are going to negotiate the strategic alliance correctly, in order to achieve better outcomes and to smooth the path towards good performance in the future.
