Functional theories of reputation imply that individuals’ reputations are tied to their history of behavior. However, indirect evidence suggests that the link between reputation and behavior may be tenuous at best. In three studies we tracked the development of reputations over time among MBA students in negotiation classes. We found that individuals’ reputations were linked to their history of behavior, but not strongly. However, the relation between reputation and behavior was more robust for some individuals than others. Specifically, for individuals who were well-known and received more social attention in the cohort, their reputation was strongly related to their behavior. In contrast, for less visible individuals who were more ignored by others, their behavior had little impact on their reputation. Finally, individuals’ behavior history in the negotiations was related to their trait agreeableness. This latter finding suggests that personality does shape behavior in negotiations, in contrast to some previous assertions; however, individuals’ behavior must be measured in aggregate, across negotiations, rather than in single interactions. The findings have implications for our understanding of reputation, the costs and benefits of social visibility, and personality effects in negotiations

This chapter explores stereotype threat in organizational contexts. Building on the understanding that stereotype threat involves concerns about confirming a negative stereotype about one’s group, we begin by elucidating the scope of potential stereotype threat effects in organizations. We first examine the ubiquity of evaluations in organizations, which are at the heart of stereotype threat. Next we specify the potential psychological consequences of stereotype threat on targeted individuals within organizations, including weakening domain identification and engagement, reducing aspirations, increasing self-handicapping, and reducing openness to feedback. In the next section we focus on specific performance consequences of stereotype threat in four domains: leadership, negotiations, entrepreneurship, and competitiveness. We follow by identifying the likely triggers of stereotype threat within organizations, including task difficulty, organizational structure, minority representation, and organizational culture. Finally, we identify three categories of strategies that organizations can implement to reduce stereotype threat: 1) stereotype management, which includes acknowledging stereotypes, emphasizing positive stereotypes, and deemphasizing negative stereotypes; 2) hiring and training, which includes increasing minority representation and job training; and 3) organizational culture, including both fostering identity safety and valuing effort.

In this dissertation I examine the elicitation of sympathy as an influence strategy to overcome weak positioning in mixed-motive interactions. I show that by making appeals to sympathy, low power individuals can mitigate their disadvantage, and can claim more value in mixed-motive situations. This dissertation makes two contributions to the literature. First, attempts to elicit emotions in others is as of yet, an underexplored area of the emotions literature. The field has examined how experiencing emotions affect our judgment and behavior, and how our emotional expressions affect others' judgment and behavior, but with a few notable exceptions (e.g. Fulmer & Barry, 2004; Kilduff, Chiaburu & Menges, 2010; Mayer & Salovey, 1997), researchers have barely scratched the surface on the idea that individuals can elicit and manage the emotional experiences of others. Thus, this dissertation explores the idea that individuals can elicit sympathy in others for their own instrumental gain. Sympathy is particularly interesting to examine, because the experience of sympathy can motivate the sympathizer to help the disadvantaged--thus showing potential as a valuable emotion to elicit in others. Second, I explore the connection between the psychology of power, and the effectiveness of appeals to sympathy. Thus far the literature on power has focused primarily on individuals in positions of power, and while notable exceptions exist (e.g. Simpson, Markovsky, & Steketee, 2011; Whitson & Galinsky, 2008), I seek to contribute to the literature on power by examining a heretofore unexplored low power influence strategy. I explore these topics in eight studies which vary in methodology and participant population, and conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of my findings, and by presenting a number of potential avenues for future research.