CONCEPTUALIZATION AND OPERATIONALISATION OF SPECIFIC VARIABLES IN EXPLORATORY RESEARCHES – AN EXAMPLE FOR BUSINESS NEGOTIATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1515/saeb-2016-0109Keywords:
variable conceptualization, operationalisation, exploratory research, research methodology, business negotiation, cultural factorsAbstract
In exploratory researches we are looking for clues, trying to get a better picture of the research variables and relationships. Besides variables already studied, identified in the literature review, we might deal with specific variables – for the investigated subject and socio-cultural region – the ones that might lead us to new explanations and theories. These new variables can be depicted from in-depth interviews and informal discussions with intervening actors, through a process of identification, conceptualization (obtaining theoretical definitions), and operationalisation (suggesting ways for the measurement of the identified variables). The present paper offers an example of such a process for a particular subject – identifying potential specific influences on the business negotiation behaviour. The focus is on the methodological aspects of such a research endeavour.
JEL Codes - L22, L25, M10, M14, M16References
Adair, W. L., and Brett, J. M., 2005. The negotiation dance: Time, culture, and behavioral sequences in negotiation. Organization Science, 16(1), 33-51. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0102
Bendersky, C., and Curhan, J. R., 2009. Cognitive dissonance in negotiation: Free choice or justification? Social Cognition, 27(3), 455-474. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2009.27.3.455
Caputo, A., 2013. A literature review of cognitive biases in negotiation processes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24(4), 374-398. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-08-2012-0064
Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., and Levy, P. E., 2009. The Development and Validation of a New Machiavellianism Scale. Journal of Management, 35(2), 219-257. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206308318618
Drollinger, T., Comer, L. B., and Warrington, P. T., 2006. Development and validation of the Active Empathetic Listening scale. Psychology and Marketing, 23(2), 161-180. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mar.20105
Durvasula, S., and Lysonski, S., 2008. A double-edged sword: understanding vanity across cultures. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(4), 230-244. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760810882425
Durvasula, S., Lysonski, S., and Watson, J., 2001. Does vanity describe other cultures? A cross-cultural examination of the vanity scale. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 180-199. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00108.x
Ger, G., and Belk, R. W., 1996. Cross-cultural differences in materialism. Journal of Economic Psychology, 17(1), 55-77. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(95)00035-6
Gheorghiu, M. A., Vignoles, V. L., and Smith, P. B., 2009. Beyond the United States and Japan: Testing Yamagishi's Emancipation Theory of Trust across 31 Nations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 72(4), 365-383. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019027250907200408
Hall, E. H., and Lee, J., 2012. Conceptual operationalisation issues within the context of an international study: Japanese and American firms. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 17(2), 97-120.
Kapoutsis, I., Volkema, R. J., and Nikolopoulos, A. G., 2013. Initiating Negotiations: The Role of Machiavellianism, Risk Propensity, and Bargaining Power. Group Decision and Negotiation, 22(6), 1081-1101. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10726-012-9306-6
Krekels, G., and Pandelaere, M., 2015. Dispositional greed. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 225-230. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.036
Lin, X., and Miller, S. J., 2003. Negotiation approaches: Direct and indirect effect of national culture. International Marketing Review, 20(3), 286-303. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651330310477602
Luomala, H. T., Kumar, R., Singh, J. D., and Jaakkola, M., 2015. When an Intercultural Business Negotiation Fails: Comparing the Emotions and Behavioural Tendencies of Individualistic and Collectivistic Negotiators. Group Decision and Negotiation, 24(3), 537-561. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10726-014-9420-8
Möllering, G., Bachmann, R., and Lee, S. H., 2004. Introduction: Understanding organizational trust - foundations, constellations, and issues of operationalisation. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(6), 556-570. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940410551480
Moyano, M., Tabernero, C., Melero, R., and Trujillo, H. M., 2015. Spanish version of the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) / Versión española de la Escala de Inteligencia Cultural (EIC). Revista de Psicología Social, 30(1), 182-216. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2014.991520
Perng, S. J., and Watson, R., 2012. Construct validation of the nurse cultural competence scale: A hierarchy of abilities. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21(11-12), 1678-1684. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03933.x
Rapp, J. K., Bernardi, R. A., and Bosco, S. M., 2011. Examining the use of Hofstede's uncertainty avoidance construct in international research: A 25 year review. International Business Research, 4(1), 1-15. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v4n1p3
Reynolds, N., Simintiras, A., and Vlachou, E., 2003. International business negotiations: Present knowledge and direction for future research. International Marketing Review, 20(3), 236-261. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651330310477585
Rohrmann, B., 2005. Risk attitude scales: concepts, questionnaires, utilizations. from www.rohrmannresearch.net Sarkar, A. N., 2010. Emerging strategic issues in global business negotiation: sharing global vision. Drishtikon: A Management Journal, 1(2), 1-36.
Scherbaum, C. A., and Meade, A. W., 2013. New Directions for Measurement in Management Research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(2), 132-148. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12003 Shi, X., 2001. Antecedent factors of international business negotiations in China context. Management International Review, 41(2), 163-187.
Simintiras, A. C., and Thomas, A. H., 1998. Cross-Cultural Sales Negotiations: A Literature Review and Research Propositions. International Marketing Review, 15(1), 10-28. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004481
Song, Y. J., Hale, C. L., and Rao, N., 2004. Success and failure of business negotiations for South Koreans. Journal of International and Area Studies, 11(2), 45-65.
Stoshikj, M., 2014. Integrative and distributive negotiations and negotiation behavior. Journal of Service Science Research, 6(1), 29-69. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12927-014-0002-8
Teo, P. C., Mohamad, O., and Ramayah, T., 2011. Testing the dimensionality of Consumer Ethnocentrism Scale (CETSCALE) among a young Malaysian consumer market segment. African Journal of Business Management, 5(7), 2805-2816. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/AJBM10.1185
Tu, Y.-T., and Chih, H.-C., 2011. An Analysis on Negotiation Styles by Religious Beliefs. International Business Research, 4(3), 243-253. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v4n3p243
Warter, I., and Warter, L., 2015. Intercultural negotiation in mergers and acquisitions. The integration of the cultural dimension into the negotiation domain. Buletinul Institutului Politehnic din Iaşi, LXI(LXV), 73-86.
Zaiț, D., Spalanzani, A., and Zaiț, A., 2015. Construcția strategică a cercetării. Opțiuni metodologice - între logic și euristic. Iași: Editura Sedcom Libris
Zaiț, D., Warter, L., and Warter, I., 2014. Cross-cultural incentives for the FDI. Cross-Cultural Management Journal, XVI(1 ), 209-221. Zaiț, D., and Zaiț, A., 2009. Research Anticipation: the Methodological Choice. Review of International Comparative Management, 10(5), 902-909.
Zhu, X., and Gao, D., 2013. Nothing Succeeds Like Success. International Studies of Management & Organization, 43(4), 26-38. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/IMO0020-8825430402
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
All accepted papers are published on an Open Access basis.
The Open Access License is based on the Creative Commons license.
The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License as currently displayed on https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license, the author(s) and users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) under the following conditions:
1. they must attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor,
2. they may not use this contribution for commercial purposes,
3. they may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.