Lecture 5 Flashcards
Dilemma in Framing:
Pragmatic Ambiguity vs Lucidity
Pragmatic ambiguity
• General terms such as “quality” (in Total Quality Management)
• Allows flexible “appropriation”/translation in diverse local contexts while uniting them under one banner
VS
Lucidity (clarity of the vision)
> Logos: the value of a good/clear definition
> Would you like to run fast for only a vague idea?
The evolutionary value of Coalition
Coalition is a highly prevalent form of in the evolution of cooperation, i.e., via network reciprocity
SH identification and Salience (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997) Explain Power: - Coercive - Utilitatian - Normative
- Coercive = force / threat
- Utilitatian = material / incentives
- Normative = symbolic influences
Hardline bargaining
high first offers, little concessions
Softline bargaining
start with concessions in order to induce concessions in the other party
• Osgood’s, (1960) “Graduated reciprocation, tension-reduction model”
-> more cooperative/trusting context
Downside to Hardline Bargening:
More profitable outcomes in one-shot interactions, but
….there is a relational cost on the long-term
•-> trust, reciprocity, benevolence become more important
•Life is not all about winning, or being right (!)
•There is value in a well-chosen concession to build a coalition (e.g., the way of diplomacy)
Social Exchange Theory
based on the notion that many human interactions, and many commercial exchanges, involve the simultaneous transacting of economic and social goods, resulting in both contractual and relational bonds.
Aspiration Theory
Recommends a rather strict bargaining style to minimize losses
The Tension Reduction Theory
Recommends installing a cooperative atmosphere with unilateral concessions
Hardline bargaining has an advantage with regard to individual economic outcomes, especially when (4)
- Visual contact is possible
- The opposing party is a male
- The negotiators are instructed to maximize outcomes
- Negotiators were aware of the zone of possible agreement
Softline bargaining has more advantage when (1)
it comes to Long-Term outcomes.
SH identification and Salience (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997)
Name 3 ways of identification
- Power
- Legitimacy
- Urgency
SH identification and Salience (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997)
Explain Urgency (2)
- Time Sensitivity = immediate action?
2. Critically = importance of SH claim?
SH identification and Salience (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997)
Explain Salience
The degree to which managers give priority to competing claims
SH identification and Salience (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997)
Name 3 forms of Power
- Coercive power
- Utilitarian power
- Normative Power
SH identification and Salience (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997)
Name 3 forms of Legitimacy
- individual legitimacy
- Organizational legitimacy
- Societal legitimacy
Justifications of power:
explain + 2 concepts
Explains how prior uses of power constrain OR enable specific modes of moral legitimation by:
- Deligation
- Multiplication
Powers of Justification:
explain + 2 concepts
explains the effects of justification on the capacity to mobilize forms of power by:
- Reshaping perceived uncertainty
- Recovering institutions
Justification of Power: explain Delegation
Omdat je een bepaalde speler bent met een bepaalde power kun je gewoonweg niet sommige orders of worth (green, civic etc) gebruiken in je justification en moet je dat dus door iemand anders laten doen
Die case ging over een bedrijf dat gas wilde winnen in de grond onder huizen van mensen in Canada.. en die liet de overheid zeggen dat het justified was want het was wettelijk zo geregeld dat het mocht en Canada zou er veel geld aan verdienen wat ze nodig hebben voor overheidszaken etc.When the use of powers led to the multiplication of actors from different segments of society to extend the normalitve orders of worth.
Letting other actors or SH do the justification (orders of worth) and speak in the name of the common good.
> because former uses of power are difficult to justify
Justification of Power: explain Multiplication
When the use of powers led to the multiplication of actors from different segments of society to extend the normative orders of worth.
> increases moral legitimacy
Interaction of justification and power:
Orders of Worth
Het model begint met een “test of worth”
Om te kijken of de legitimation die een bedrijf aan iets geeft wel klopt. Civil organisations die questionen de intenties van dat gasboor bedrijf en die vindt dat je “market” order of worth niet meer klopt, omdat een “civic” order of worth tegenwoordig belangrijker is: dat de huizen van mensen worden kapotgemaakt en dat het slecht is voor het milieu etc.
- Civic,
- green,
- market,
- industry,
- domestic
- Fame
- Inspired
(7 totaal)
Identification and quantification of common worlds. In line with Patriotta et al. (2011), a systematic content analysis of all 196 newspaper articles focused on the controversy was conducted.
Gond et al. Interaction of justification and power:
identify and explain the four facets of power
- Authority: using legal or legitimized forms of power in a context of conflict of interests.
- Coercion: the action of persuading someone by using force or threats
- Manipulation: controlling someone or something to your own advantage, often unfairly or dishonestly
- Domination: attempts to make relations of power appear inevitable and natural
Explain 4 types of Logics:
- Criminal punishment
- Rehabilitation
- Community accountability
- Efficiency
- Criminal punishment = focus on the participants obiedience, respect for authority, rules & expectations
- Rehabilitation = look at person as a whole, help them
- Community accountability = oriented to the interest of the public
- Efficiency = pressure to get results. Focused on maximalization of utility & following a rational business model
