11.25.14
Tajfel’s contributions
 Categorization seems to be human nature
 Tajfel and minimal group paradigm
 Leads to Social Identity Theory
 Tendency to associate also ubiquitous
 Implicit Association Test
These both relate to bounded rationality
More complex patterns emerge
 Prejudice and discrimination
 Stereotyping and stigma
Social psychological research helps to explore not only
the existence of these, but also the results
(Stereotype threat/lift, cognitive effects, liking/respect)
In groups of 3…
 Discuss the implications of the research on attitudes
and intergroup relations on practical discussions of
equity and diversity
 Report back on a concrete intervention that could be
derived from insights in psychology in this area
11.25.14
The big picture
 Consider the mythical fixed pie
 Inside versus outside view
 Keep the FAE in mind (interests v. positions)
Key points to remember
 Preparation of BATNA
 Do your homework!
 Beware of emotion
 Interests v. Positions
 Relative importance of interests
 Trade on issues to create value!
Other issues
 Framing!
 Loss aversion can be huge
 Escalation of commitment
 Sunk cost effects
 Self-serving biases
 Anchoring
What about informal negotiation?
 Women and negotiation
 Consider competitive/motivated biases
 Recognize opportunities to negotiatiate!
 Babcock’s “negotiation gym”
Avoid bias in judgment
 Search for post-settlement settlements!
 Simple awareness of biases in judgment
 Anticipate strategies by others
 Avoid errors and self-evaluating
 Inside vs. Outside view of scenarios
Women don’t ask:
The gender divide in negotiation
 Dislike of negotiation
 “winning a ballgame” vs “going to the dentist”
 Men initiate more frequently
 Differences in salary, up to $500,000 in lifetime
….but
 Women are often better negotiators for others
Things to take away…
 Planning ahead!
 Inside vs. Outside view
 Playing role of devil’s advocate
More Resources
 Raiffa, The art and science of negotiation (1985)
 Malhotra & Bazerman, Negotiation genius (2007)
 Babcock & Laschever, Women Don’t Ask: Negotiation
and the gender divide (2003)
Final Paper
 Due December 9th at 5pm (hard copy preferred)
 8-10 single spaced pages
 I’m looking for:
 A clear understanding of psychological insights
 Thoughtful application to a practical policy issue
The final paper can be
 A proposal for a specific policy analysis or
implementation
 A research proposal with policy implications
 A discussion of how an existing line of research has
policy implications
*Can have one or more of these elements
*Can be an extension of one of your previous
assignments