From Preparation to Performance: Conscientiousness Predicts Negotiation Planning and Value Claiming

Abstract

Individual difference researchers observe that conscientiousness predicts job but not negotiation performance. This may reflect a genuine absence of this trait's impact on negotiation. But this could also be due to methodological choices in studies to date. Most studies relied on small sample sizes and highly structured negotiation problems that limit opportunities for preparation. This paper takes a novel approach to examining conscientiousness in negotiation by (1) deploying a complex simulation that demands considerable planning effort, (2) examining variation in planning behavior, and (3) using dyadic data analysis methods with an adequately powered sample. In the two samples comprising Studies 1A and 1B (combined N = 566), higher conscientiousness predicted more value claimed, and counterpart conscientiousness predicted less value claimed in settlements. Follow-up studies examined planning behavior. Study 2 (N = 301) demonstrated that conscientious negotiators spent more time planning and placed greater import on information relevant to the negotiation. Conscientiousness correlated positively with peer ratings of distributive efficiency. Study 3 (N = 153) not only replicated the positive relationship between conscientiousness and greater time spent planning but also identified a U-shaped relationship between the trait and effortful planning behaviors. The results suggest that conscientiousness represents a previously underappreciated contributor to effective negotiation. By loosening the constraints on bargaining present in most negotiation studies, we observed a pattern consistent with many prior studies of job performance—conscientiousness predicts individual outcomes and planning behavior. These studies highlight a need to expand the empirical and theoretical exploration of negotiation processes beyond the bargaining phase.