Supply Excellence — Battle of the Sexes: Are Women Better Negotiators than Men?

Battle of the Sexes: Are Women Better Negotiators than Men?

August 21st, 2006 · by Tim Minahan · No Comments · contract management, skills rectruitment and development

A previous Supply Excellence post reported that studies from both ISM and Purchasing Magazine found that women are still paid one-third less than men in similar supply management roles. However, both studies reported an increase in the number of women in top procurement and supply management roles. A new study from the International Association for Contract and Commercial Management (IACCM) suggests one reason why women are snagging top posts: women are better negotiators and relationship managers than men.

I have asked IACCM President and CEO Tim Cummins to share the highlights of this study below. Tim, who will provide a keynote speech on Contracting Excellence at the upcoming Empower 2006 Conference, reveals the findings of the latest IACCM skills, recruitment, and development study below:

IACCM recently conducted a survey on negotiation style and approach. The inputs were cross-industry and came from more than 30 countries. This brief article describes what the results reveal about gender-based differences.

While women are well represented in contract management overall, they appear to be significantly under-represented in the field of negotiation. Only 30% of the participants were female (this rose to 40% in US and some Northern European countries; it sank to 20% or less in most other parts of Europe and Asia-Pacific). The percentage varied little within age groups (except under 29, where - in a relatively small sample group - the females were in a slight majority); and it also made little difference by job function (except Legal, where the percentage of women dropped to 15%).
Stereotypical views that men are more likely to be risk-takers (a view historically supported by female self-assessments) and that women are more inclined to ‘win-win’ negotiation are not supported by the results of this survey .
Women are significantly more inclined to seek a relationship rather than being fixated on ‘the deal’. They also show appreciably higher time sensitivity than male participants.
Women are less concerned about having ‘one leader’ in a negotiation and prefer a top-down approach to the way the negotiation is conducted.

Since this was a self-assessment and did not seek comments, we can only surmise the factors that lie behind these results.

If female negotiators are indeed in a minority, why might this be? Is it through choice, or because of constraints? Does the fact that women are in a majority in the under 29 age group indicate either a) there is a change underway or b) that in older groups, the demands of family or other ‘value shifts’ make the typical negotiator job less attractive?
The survey showed men and women pretty much equal in their approach to risk. Around 30% in each case are open to ‘high risk’ and approximately the same percentage showed themselves ‘risk averse’. When it comes to ‘win-win’, 83% of women and 80% of men select this as their preferred style. Of course, we don’t know whether there is any gender-based variation in what we consider ‘risky’ to be, or how we define ‘win-win’ results and behaviors. For example, one recent commentator implied that women are more open to compromise - is this true and does it suggest that mutual compromises represent win-win?
39% of men focus on the contract, against just 23% of women. Women show themselves significantly more inclined towards the relationship. This is interesting, since it is commonly acknowledged that relationship negotiation takes more time than a contract-focus, yet 76% of females perceive themselves as highly time-sensitive, versus only 63% of men.
Women are less likely to be emotional in a negotiation than their male counterparts. Although the difference is not dramatic, it is appreciable and certainly runs counter to the common view that typical males would have!
Women are more prepared to be democratic in the negotiation process. They are less concerned about having one leader or authority figure. This is one of the few findings that probably aligns with wider social research.
In areas of personal style, agreement form and communication there was no significant male / female difference.

Overall, the results showed a high level of consistency in the attitudes and style of male and female negotiators. There was little to imply that one or other might gain better results, or that they might be better suited for particular types of negotiation. Perhaps the only slight indicator was that men - because of their tendency to focus on the contract and their preference for ‘authority’ - may be more comfortable with confrontational negotiations - for example, those associated with commodity supply. On the same basis, a higher proportion of women would perhaps excel at solution or relationship agreements. Are we seeing such similarities because there really is little difference in male / female style as negotiators; or is it because the only women who are allowed to become negotiators are those that fit a common (male dominated) value model?

IACCM welcome your views and comments, including any ideas for further research or discussion on this topic.

Thanks, Tim. Now if we can only turn some of those peak negotiating skills to securing pay-scale parity for women. I encourage Supply Excellence readers to join and participate in IACCM studies and events. If you would like to contribute to the study (all participants will receive the on-going reports) simply go to http://www.iaccm.com/surveys/talent/

Email Forward & Bookmarks