Do You Want a Dictator in Your Cocktail Bar? The Effect of Asymmetric Power Dispersion and Social Motives on Group Negotiation Behavior

How does a dictator decision-making rule (where one person has total control over the outcomes of the others) affect three-person group negotiations? It was predicted that the effect of having a powerful leader depends on social motives. Since power holders are reward-prone action takers, under a pro-social motivation, groups with a leader should reach more integrative outcomes than groups without a leader, because the leaders actively coordinate the negotiations. Under a pro-self motivation, groups with a leader should reach less integrative outcomes than leaderless groups, because selfish leaders use their power to further their own, rather than the collective outcomes. Results of a role-play negotiation study with three-person groups negotiating the newly developed “Aloha Beach Club” exercise supported these predictions. Pro-social groups with a dictator gained higher joint outcomes than groups in all other conditions. Results also showed that selfish leaders increase their own outcomes by exploiting their subordinates.