협상자 특성과 조직지원이 협상만족과 지속적 거래의도에 미치는 영향 : 신뢰구축의 매개효과

This study examines not only the influences of negotiator’s characteristics and organizational support on negotiation performance, but also verifies the role of trust building as a mediator based on negotiation process approach. Negotiation literatures suggest that negotiator’s characteristics consist of two variables such as planning/preparation and clear sense of purpose of negotiation and organizational support consists of two variables such as delegation of authority and incentive. Negotiation performance is conceptualized as negotiation satisfaction and intention to continuous dealing based on the negotiation traits, motivation and structural process approach. Main effect and mediating effect hypotheses are as follows: H1: Negotiator’s characteristics (planning/preparation and clear sense of purpose) have positive impacts on negotiation performance. H2:Organizational support (delegation of authority and incentives) has positive impacts on negotiation performance. H3:Trust building mediates between antecedent variables (negotiator’s characteristics, and organizational support) and negotiation performance. For empirical analysis, survey method was performed. Samples are corporate employees engaged in business negotiation. A total of 214 questionnaires are used for analysis. First, as main effect hypotheses predict, negotiator’s characteristics impact significantly on the negotiation performance. Specifically, planning/preparation and clear sense of purpose impact positively on negotiation satisfaction (betas=.18, .32; p<.01, .001) and planning/preparation impacts positively on intention to continuous dealing (beta=.40, p<.001). However, a clear sense of purpose does not affect significantly the final outcome variable (beta=-.02, n.s). The two organizational support variables show different impacts on negotiation performance. Delegation of authority affects positively on negotiation satisfaction (beta=.23, p<.01) does not affect on the intention to continuous dealing (beta=.06, n.s). However. the effect of incentives on intention to continuous dealing is not significant (beta=.15, p<.01). It also does not affect negotiation satisfaction(beta=.05, n.s). Second, as for the mediating effect hypothesis, trust building mediates partially between organizational support and negotiation performance. That is, the direct effects of negotiators' planning/preparation are greater than indirect effects on negotiation performance (betas=.18 vs. .04 and .32 vs. .06); also the direct effect of clear sense of purpose is greater than indirect effect on negotiation satisfaction (beta=.40 vs. .00). Trust building does not mediate between negotiator’s characteristics and negotiation performance. Organizational support has significant effects on negotiation performance through trust building; the direct effect of delegation of authority is greater than indirect effect on negotiation satisfaction (beta=.23 vs. .05), while the indirect effect of delegation of authority on intention to continuous dealing is larger than the direct effect (beta=.05 vs. .08); incentive’s indirect effect is greater than direct effect on negotiation satisfaction (beta=.07 vs. -.06). For the intention to continuous dealing, direct and indirect effects are almost equal (beta=.15 vs. .12). Based on the results, when negotiators plan various scenarios for real negotiation situation in advance and prepare for the expected requirements of the negotiation partners, they develop a clear sense of negotiation goals to pursuit it. The upshot is that negotiation results are satisfied enough to think about continuous dealing for long-term relationship. Turning to the organizational support of negotiators, delegation of authority and incentives show different results; delegation of authority to decision-makers generates satisfaction with negotiation results, but does not lead to intention to continuous dealing. on the other hands, incentives do not produce satisfaction of negotiation results, but leads to the intention to continue to negotiate. This implies that negotiation performance depends on negotiator’s power and position. Incentives or extrinsic rewards spur the negotiators not to fall into a trap of bad decisions under the situational change. Trust building mediates partially between organizational support and negotiation performance, but negotiator’s planning/preparation and clear sense of purpose affect directly on negotiation performance. This indicates that organizational support is very important to improve mutual trust building in relation to negotiation performance. Specially, for long-term relationships, organizations should provide negotiators with atmosphere of delegation of authority, as well as devote themselves to establishing fair performance evaluations for incentives.