Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0805109-212621 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0805109-212621
論文名稱
Title
性別差異對於電子化談判回應策略的影響
The Impact of Gender Difference on Response Strategy in E-Negotiation
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
77
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2009-07-02
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2009-08-05
關鍵字
Keywords
電子化談判、序列模式、回應策略、性別差異
Electronic negotiation, Response strategy, Sequential pattern, Gender difference
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5777 次,被下載 1365
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5777 times, has been downloaded 1365 times.
中文摘要
今日人們已經習慣在網路上進行各種商業活動;電子化談判也由於其優勢而越來越受歡迎。如今也有越來越多的女性在職場上位居重要職務,並代表其公司進行各種重要活動,如與合作夥伴利用電子化談判來協商交易條件。而若談判者能夠了解男女雙方在進行電子化談判時所展現出來的行為序列模式及回應策略上的性別差異,則有助於談判者在談判時與其對手能有較佳的互動,無論其對手性別為何。

本研究探索在電子化談判下,不同的談判者性別組合與回應策略間的關連。我們設計了一個演算法來尋找顯著的行為序列模式,再基於三種回應策略來將其歸類。之後我們利用卡方獨立性檢定來測試性別組合與回應策略間的關連,最後再用卡方檢定的事後分析來比較那一種性別組合在三種回應策略間有顯著較高的比例。

研究結果指出性別組合與回應策略彼此是互相關連的。混合性別組合中的談判者更有可能以互惠型的策略來回應對手;而相同性別組合的談判者則較可能以結構型的策略來回應對手。另外純女性的談判組合在三種回應策略上皆明顯地高於純男性的談判組合。最後女性會用較多的互惠型策略來回應男性對手及較多的互補型及結構型策略來回應女性對手;而男性也會用較多的互惠型策略來回應女性對手及較多的結構型策略來回應男性對手。
Abstract
Today people already accustom to do businesses on the Internet. The electronic negotiation also becomes popular because of its advantages. Furthermore more and more females get high positions in their company and often engage important activities such as electronic negotiation for their company. If negotiators could understand the differences of males and females on their behavioral sequence and response strategy, they could have a better interaction during negotiation no matter what their counterpart s gender is.

This study explores the relation of different gender compositions and response strategy in E-Negotiation. We design an algorithm to find significant sequential patterns and then group them into three kinds of response strategies. Lastly we use Chi-Square Independence Test to see the correlation and Column Comparison to see
which gender composition has significant higher proportion on three types of response strategies.

The result suggests gender compositions and response strategies are interrelated. Negotiators in inter-gender dyad are more likely to response with reciprocal strategy
and negotiators in intra-gender dyad are more likely to response with structural strategy. Moreover female-only dyad is more likely to response with all kinds of strategies compared to male-only dyad. Finally female would response to male with more reciprocal strategies and to female with more complementary and structural strategies. On the other hand, male would response to female counterpart with more reciprocal strategies and to male counterpart with more structural strategies.
目次 Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction.................................................................................. 6
1.1 Background .......................................................................... 6
1.2 Research Motivation ........................................................... 6
1.3 Research Purpose ............................................................. 8
Chapter 2. Literature Review ................................................. 10
2.1 Negotiation and E-Negotiation ....................................... 10
2.1.1 Basic Negotiation Concept .......................................... 10
2.1.2 Features of E-Negotiation ............................................ 11
2.2 Gender Differences .......................................................... 13
2.2.1 General Gender Differences ....................................... 13
2.2.2 Gender Differences in Communication..................... 13
2.2.3 Gender Differences in Computer-mediated Communication ....................................................................... 14
2.3 Negotiation Behavior, Strategy and Sequence ........... 15
2.3.1 The Classification of Negotiation Behavior and Strategy ..................................................................................... 15
2.3.2 Types of Behavior Sequence ...................................... 17
Chapter 3. Research Framework ........................................ 18
Chapter 4. Research Methodology ...................................... 20
4.1 Research Process ........................................................... 20
4.2 Data Collection ................................................................. 22
4.2.1 Data Description ........................................................... 22
4.2.2 Content Analysis ........................................................... 24
4.2.3 Category Schema ......................................................... 28
4.3 Algorithm of Finding Sequential Pattern ...................... 31
Chapter 5. Analysis and Results ......................................... 35
5.1 Whole Group ..................................................................... 35
5.2 Intra-gender v.s. Inter-gender Groups........................... 38
5.2.1 Descriptions of Intra-gender and Inter-gender Groups ..................................................................................................... 38
5.2.2 The Test of Intra-gender and Inter-gender Groups ..................................................................................................... 42
5.3 Mixed(f→m) vs. Mixed(m→f) Gender Groups .............. 44
5.3.1 Descriptions of Mixed(f→m) and Mixed(m→f) Groups ..................................................................................................... 44
5.3.2 The Test of Mixed(f→m) and Mixed(m→f) Groups ..................................................................................................... 48
5.4 Female-only vs. Male-only Groups ..................................................................................................... 50
5.4.1 Descriptions of Female-only and Male-only Groups ..................................................................................................... 50
5.4.2 The Test of Female-only and Male-only Groups ..................................................................................................... 53
5.5 Female-only vs. Mixed(m→f) Groups ........................... 55
5.5.1 Descriptions of Female-only and Mixed(m→f) Groups .................................................................................................... 55
5.5.2 The Test of Female-only and Mixed(m→f) Groups .................................................................................................... 57
5.6 Male-only vs. Mixed(f→m) Groups ............................... 59
5.6.1 Descriptions of Male-only and Mixed(f→m) Groups..................................................................................... 59
5.6.2 The Test of Male-only and Mixed(f→m) Groups ................................................................................................... 62
5.7 Proposed Propositions ................................................. 64
Chapter 6. Conclusions............................................................................ 66
6.1 Empirical Findings and Applications .......................... 66
6.2 Limitation .......................................................................... 66
6.3 Future Research ............................................................. 67
References ............................................................................. 68
參考文獻 References
1. Adair, W. L. and J. M. Brett (2005). "The Negotiation Dance: Time, Culture, and Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation." Organization Science 16(1): 33-51.
2. Barkhi, R., V. S. Jacob, et al. (1999). "An Experimental Analysis of Face to Face versus Computer Mediated Communication Channels." Group Decision and Negotiation 8(4): 325-347.
3. Bichler, M., G. Kersten, et al. (2003). "Towards a structured design of electronic negotiations." Group Decision and Negotiation 12(4): 311-335.
4. Brett, J. M., D. L. Shapiro, et al. (1998). "Breaking the Bonds of Reciprocity in Negotiations." Accademy of Management Journal 41: 410-424.
5. Brett, J. M., L. R. Weingart, et al. (2002). "Baubles, bangles and beads: modeling the evolution of negotiating groups over time." Research on Managing Groups and Teams: Time in Groups 6.
6. Bui, T., U. Sch, et al. (1992). Building DSS for negotiators: a three-step design process.
7. Coates, J. (1986). "Women, men and languages: Studies in language and linguistics." Longmen. London.
8. Deaux, K. (1985). "Sex and gender." Annual review of psychology 36(1): 49-81.
9. Deaux, K. and B. Major (2000). "A social-psychological model of gender." The gendered society reader: 81–91.
10. Delaney, M. M., A. Foroughi, et al. (1997). "An empirical study of the efficacy of a computerized negotiation support system (NSS)." Decision Support Systems 20(3): 185-197.
11. DeSanctis, G. and M. S. Poole (1994). "Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory." Organization science: 121-147.
12. Donohue, W. A. (1981). "Development of a Model of Rule Use in Negotiation Interaction." Communication Monographs 48(2): 106-20.
13. Fiske, S. T. (1998). "Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination." The handbook of social psychology 2: 357–411.
14. Friedman, R. A., S. C. Currall, et al. (2004). "E-mail escalation: Dispute exacerbating elements of electronic communication." Nashvill, Vanderbilt University: 39.
15. Gefen, D. and D. W. Straub (1997). "Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model." MIS quarterly: 389-400.
16. Gilligan, C. (1993). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development, Harvard University Press.
17. Hiltz, S. R. and K. Johnson (1990). "User satisfaction with computer-mediated communication systems." Management Science: 739-764.
18. Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values, Sage.
19. Holsapple, C. W., H. Lai, et al. (1998). "A Formal Basis for Negotiation Support System Research." Group decision and Negotiation 7(3): 203-227.
20. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities, Addison-Wesley Reading, MA.
21. Jain, B. A. and J. S. Solomon (2000). "The effect of task complexity and conflict handling styles on computer-supported negotiations." Information & Management 37(4): 161-168.
22. Jeong, A. (2005). "A Guide to Analyzing Message–Response Sequences and Group Interaction Patterns in Computer-mediated Communication." Distance Education 26(3): 367-383.
23. Jeong, A. C. (2003). "The Sequential Analysis of Group Interaction and Critical Thinking in Online." The American Journal of Distance Education 17(1): 25-43.
24. Jonassen, D. H. and H. Kwon (2001). "Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving." Educational Technology Research and Development 49(1): 35-51.
25. Kersten, G. and S. Noronha (1999). "Negotiation via the World Wide Web: A Cross-cultural Study of Decision Making." Group Decision and Negotiation 8(3): 251-279.
26. Kersten, G. E. (2003). The science and engineering of e-negotiation: an introduction. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
27. Kersten, G. E. and H. Lai (2007). "Satisfiability and completeness of protocols for electronic negotiations." European Journal of Operational Research 180(2): 922-937.
28. Koeszegi, S. T., E. M. Pesendorfer, et al. (2006). "Gender Salience in Electronic Negotiations." Electronic Markets 16(3): 173-185.
29. Kray, L. J., A. D. Galinsky, et al. (2002). "Reversing the Gender Gap in Negotiations: An Exploration of Stereotype Regeneration." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 87(2): 386-410.
30. Lai, H., H. S. Doong, et al. (2006). "Negotiators'Communication, Perception of Their Counterparts, and Performance in Dyadic E-negotiations." Group Decision and Negotiation 15(5): 429-447.
31. Langley, A. N. N. (1999). "Strategise for Theorizing from Process Data." Strategies 24(4): 691-710.
32. Lengel, R. H. and R. L. Daft (1989). "The selection of communication media as an executive skill." The Academy of Management Executive (1987-1989): 225-232.
33. Lewicki, R. J., J. A. Litterer, et al. (1994). Negotiation. Burr Ridge, 111, Irwin.
34. Lewicki, R. J., S. E. Weiss, et al. (1992). "Models of conflict, negotiation and third party intervention: A review and synthesis." Journal of Organizational Behavior 13(3).
35. Matheson, K. (1991). "Social cues in computer-mediated negotations: Gener makes a difference." Computers in Human Behavior 7(3): 137-145.
36. Mayring, P. (2002). "Qualitative content analysis–research instrument or mode of interpretation." The role of the researcher in qualitative psychology 2: 139–148.
37. McGuire, T. W., S. Kiesler, et al. (1987). "Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52(5): 917-930.
38. Medina, F. J., M. A. Dorado, et al. (2004). "Behavioural Sequences in the Effectiveness of Conflict Management." Psychology in Spain 8(1): 38-47.
39. Newton, J. (1995). "Task-based interaction and incidental vocabulary learning: a case study." Second Language Research 11(2): 159.
40. Olekalns, M., J. M. Brett, et al. (2003). "Phases, transitions and interruptions: Modeling processes in multi-party negotiations." International Journal of Conflict Management 14(3/4): 191-211.
41. Olekalns, M. and P. L. Smith (1999). "Social Value Orientations and Strategy Choices in Competitive Negotiations." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25(6): 657.
42. Perkins, W. C., J. C. Hershauer, et al. (1996). "Can a negotiation support system help a purchasing manager?" The Journal of Supply Chain Management 32(2): 37-45.
43. Poole, M. S. and J. Roth (1989). "Decision Development in Small Groups IV A Typology of Group Decision Paths." Human Communication Research 15(3): 323-356.
44. Poole, M. S., D. L. Shannon, et al. (1992). "Communication media and negotiation processes." Communication and negotiation: 46-66.
45. Pruitt, D. G. (1983). "Strategic choice in negotiation." American Behavioral Scientist 27(2): 167.
46. Putnam, L. L. and T. S. Jones (1982). "Reciprocity in Negotiations: An Analysis of Bargaining Interaction." Communication Monographs 49(3): 171-91.
47. Rubin, J. Z. and B. R. Brown (1975). The social psychology of bargaining and negotiation, Academic Pr.
48. Scott, M. and P. G. DeSanctis (1992). "Microlevel structuration in computer-supported group decision making." Human Communication Research 19(1): 5-49.
49. Sheffield, J. (1995). "The effect of communication medium on negotiation performance." Group Decision and Negotiation 4(2): 159-179.
50. Sokolova, M. and S. Szpakowicz (2007). "Strategies and language trends in learning success and failure of negotiation." Group Decision and Negotiation 16(5): 469-484.
51. Srnka, K., S. Koeszegi, et al. (2007). "From Words to Numbers: How to Transform Qualitative Data into Meaningful Quantitative Results." Schmalenbach Business Review (59): pp 29-57.
52. Stuhlmacher, A. F. and M. V. Champagne (2000). "The Impact of Time Pressure and Information on Negotiation Process and Decisions." Group Decision and Negotiation 9(6): 471-491.
53. Stuhlmacher, A. F., M. Citera, et al. (2007). "Gender Differences in Virtual Negotiation: Theory and Research." Sex Roles 57(5): 329-339.
54. Stuhlmacher, A. F. and A. Walters (1999). "Gender Differences in Negotiation Outcome: a Meta-Analysis." Personnel Psychology 52(3): 653-677.
55. Tannen, D. (1990). "You just don't understand: Men and women in conversation." New York: Morrow.
56. Tannen, D. (1994). Talking from 9 to 5: How women's and men's conversational styles affect who gets heard, who gets credit, and what gets done at work, William Morrow & Co.
57. Van de Walle, B., C. Campbell, et al. (2007). "The Impact of Task Structure and Negotiation Sequence on Distributed Requirements Negotiation Activity, Conflict, and Satisfaction." Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4495: 381.
58. Walton, R. E. and R. B. McKersie (1965). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations, McGraw-Hill New York.
59. Wang, Z. and J. Lim (2007). Effect of Gender Composition and Negotiation Support Systems in Dyadic Setting, IEEE.
60. Watson, C. (1994). "Gender Differences in Negotiating Behavior and Outcomes: Fact or Artifact?" Conflict and gender: 191.
61. Weingart, L. R., J. M. Brett, et al. (2007). "Conflicting Social Motives in Negotiating Groups." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93(6): 994.
62. Weingart, L. R., M. J. Prietula, et al. (1999). "Knowledge and the Sequential Processes of Negotiation: A Markov Chain Analysis of Response-in-Kind." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35(4): 366-393.
63. Wolfe, R. J. and K. L. McGinn (2005). "Perceived Relative Power and its Influence on Negotiations." Group Decision and Negotiation 14(1): 3-20.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內外都一年後公開 withheld
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code