When vigilance prevails: The effect of regulatory focus and accountability on integrative negotiation outcomes

Negotiators often bargain on behalf of constituents to whom they feel accountable. We argue that prior evidence for the superior outcomes of promotion-focused (vs. prevention-focused) negotiators may not hold when negotiators perceive high accountability to a third party. In two studies, we found that prevention-focused dyads achieved better joint financial outcomes than promotion-focused dyads in situations where high performance was expected and evaluated by a supervisor (i.e., high accountability condition). In Study 2, we found that prevention-focused individuals perceived a better regulatory fit in the high accountability condition and that the regulatory fit of both parties in a dyad was related to more integrative solutions.