Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of motivational orientations on negotiation outcomes in unstable negotiation contexts. Instability was created by pitting individualists against cooperators (mixed dyads), and by giving only one of the parties information about the other party's orientation. A total of 162 subjects participated in negotiation simulations, where orientation and information were manipulated through instructions from management. The cooperative dyads got better outcomes than did the individualistic dyads. The mixed dyads did as well as the cooperative dyads when the cooperators had information, but did as badly as the individualistic dyads when the individualists had information. The process analyses indicated that the dyads with high outcomes achieved their results because the integrative activities increased over time. In the mixed dyads with informed individualists, the individualists reached higher individual outcome than their cooperative (uninformed) opponents. Thus, naive cooperators can easily be exploited.