* Dean @ Adelson School of Entrepreneurship at Reichman University (IDC, Herzliya) – Israel's most prestigious private university. * Research interests: behavioral decision making, negotiation, creativity, and innovation. * B.A. (magna cum laude) from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, the "Amirim" interdisciplinary honors program. * PhD. in Business Administration in the direct program for excellent Ph.D. students at Tel Aviv University. * More than 20 years of experience in teaching and training young adults, students at B.A. and M.A. levels and managers from Israel, the US, Singapore, Germany and China. * Author of two children's books and a book on negotiation. * Vast field experience both as an entrepreneur and as a management consultant working with leading Israeli companies.
Recent accomplishments in genome sequencing techniques have resulted in vast and complex genomic ... more Recent accomplishments in genome sequencing techniques have resulted in vast and complex genomic data sets, which have been used to uncover the genetic correlates of not only strictly medical phenomena but also psychological characteristics such as personality traits. In this commentary, we call for the use of genomic data analysis to unlock the valuable field of the genetics of entrepreneurship. Understanding what makes an entrepreneur and what explains their success is paramount given the importance of entrepreneurship to individual, organizational, and societal growth and success. Most of the studies into the genetics of entrepreneurship have investigated familial entrepreneurial inclinations in the form of parent–offspring comparisons or twin studies. However, these do not offer a complete picture of the etiology of entrepreneurship. The use of big data analytics combined with the rapidly growing field of genetic mapping has the potential to offer a more complete picture of the ...
Although most scholars recommend making the first offer in negotiations, recent research and prac... more Although most scholars recommend making the first offer in negotiations, recent research and practitioners' experience have uncovered a second‐mover advantage in certain situations. In the current article, we explore this first‐ versus second‐mover dynamic by investigating the circumstances under which negotiators would make less favorable first offers than they would receive were they to move second, focusing on the effects of negotiation power in the form of alternatives. Additionally, we examine the effects of low power on reservation prices and whether these effects could be mitigated using an anchor‐debiasing technique. In Study 1, we manipulated negotiators' power in the form of the best alternative to the negotiated agreement and examined its effect on first offers and reservation prices. Our results showed that low‐power negotiators would receive more favorable first offers than they would have made themselves when facing either low‐ or medium‐power counterparts. Also, our results suggest that low‐power negotiators had less favorable reservation prices than their medium‐ and high‐ power counterparts. In Study 2, we investigated whether this effect would persist in the face of anchor‐debiasing techniques. Our results showed that while anchor‐debiasing techniques did improve their first offers, low‐power negotiators would still benefit from making the counteroffer rather than moving first. Our findings uncover the disadvantageous effects of low power on first‐offer magnitude while offering practical advice to negotiators.
For the past two decades, negotiation research has established a first‐mover advantage based on t... more For the past two decades, negotiation research has established a first‐mover advantage based on the anchoring and adjustment heuristic. Negotiation scholars have argued that first offers serve as anchors that affect both counteroffers and settlement prices. Consequently, management education—including negotiation articles, books, courses, and seminars—often recommends that negotiators move first to “anchor” their counterparts. Nonetheless, a growing body of recent research contradicts this general advice and points to a second‐mover advantage in specific cases. Interestingly, this contradiction was termed the “practitioner‐researcher paradox,” as practitioners and negotiation experts appeared to understand the benefits of moving second in negotiations, which scholars—up until recently—generally have overlooked. The current article offers a solution to this paradox by proposing three key factors that might explain the conditions and circumstances of first‐ versus second‐mover advantage in negotiations. These three factors are central in negotiation research and practice: information, power, and strategy. Given the centrality of first offers in negotiations, the solution to this paradox is crucial for negotiation scholars, businesspeople, managers, and anyone else who finds themselves in a negotiation.
This article aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing literature on the hackathon p... more This article aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing literature on the hackathon phenomenon to offer scholars a common ground for future research and managers and practitioners research-based guidelines on best planning and running a hackathon. A review of the most relevant literature on hackathons was conducted to serve as the research basis for our integrative model and guidelines. This article synthesizes the research on hackathons to offer comprehensible guidelines for practitioners while also providing questions for future hackathon researchers. We differentiate between the different design characteristics of hackathons while noting their advantages and disadvantages, discuss tools and methodologies for successful hackathon setup and execution step-by-step, and provide recommendations to encourage project continuity.
The literature on behavioral decision-making and negotiations to date usually advocates first-mov... more The literature on behavioral decision-making and negotiations to date usually advocates first-mover advantage in distributive negotiations, and bases this preference on the anchoring heuristic. In the following paper, we suggest that the preference for moving first vs. moving second in negotiations may not be as clear-cut as presumed, especially in situations characterized by information asymmetry between negotiating counterparts. In Study 1, we examined people's initiation preferences and found that unless taught otherwise, people intuitively often prefer to move second. In Studies 2--4, we experimentally tested the suggested advantage of moving second, and demonstrated that in information-asymmetry scenarios – when one party has perfect background information and the other has none --- it is actually preferable for both counterparts not to give the first offer while negotiating. We discuss the implications of our findings on the field of negotiation and decision-making, and ...
Recent accomplishments in genome sequencing techniques have resulted in vast and complex genomic ... more Recent accomplishments in genome sequencing techniques have resulted in vast and complex genomic data sets, which have been used to uncover the genetic correlates of not only strictly medical phenomena but also psychological characteristics such as personality traits. In this commentary, we call for the use of genomic data analysis to unlock the valuable field of the genetics of entrepreneurship. Understanding what makes an entrepreneur and what explains their success is paramount given the importance of entrepreneurship to individual, organizational, and societal growth and success. Most of the studies into the genetics of entrepreneurship have investigated familial entrepreneurial inclinations in the form of parent–offspring comparisons or twin studies. However, these do not offer a complete picture of the etiology of entrepreneurship. The use of big data analytics combined with the rapidly growing field of genetic mapping has the potential to offer a more complete picture of the ...
Although most scholars recommend making the first offer in negotiations, recent research and prac... more Although most scholars recommend making the first offer in negotiations, recent research and practitioners' experience have uncovered a second‐mover advantage in certain situations. In the current article, we explore this first‐ versus second‐mover dynamic by investigating the circumstances under which negotiators would make less favorable first offers than they would receive were they to move second, focusing on the effects of negotiation power in the form of alternatives. Additionally, we examine the effects of low power on reservation prices and whether these effects could be mitigated using an anchor‐debiasing technique. In Study 1, we manipulated negotiators' power in the form of the best alternative to the negotiated agreement and examined its effect on first offers and reservation prices. Our results showed that low‐power negotiators would receive more favorable first offers than they would have made themselves when facing either low‐ or medium‐power counterparts. Also, our results suggest that low‐power negotiators had less favorable reservation prices than their medium‐ and high‐ power counterparts. In Study 2, we investigated whether this effect would persist in the face of anchor‐debiasing techniques. Our results showed that while anchor‐debiasing techniques did improve their first offers, low‐power negotiators would still benefit from making the counteroffer rather than moving first. Our findings uncover the disadvantageous effects of low power on first‐offer magnitude while offering practical advice to negotiators.
For the past two decades, negotiation research has established a first‐mover advantage based on t... more For the past two decades, negotiation research has established a first‐mover advantage based on the anchoring and adjustment heuristic. Negotiation scholars have argued that first offers serve as anchors that affect both counteroffers and settlement prices. Consequently, management education—including negotiation articles, books, courses, and seminars—often recommends that negotiators move first to “anchor” their counterparts. Nonetheless, a growing body of recent research contradicts this general advice and points to a second‐mover advantage in specific cases. Interestingly, this contradiction was termed the “practitioner‐researcher paradox,” as practitioners and negotiation experts appeared to understand the benefits of moving second in negotiations, which scholars—up until recently—generally have overlooked. The current article offers a solution to this paradox by proposing three key factors that might explain the conditions and circumstances of first‐ versus second‐mover advantage in negotiations. These three factors are central in negotiation research and practice: information, power, and strategy. Given the centrality of first offers in negotiations, the solution to this paradox is crucial for negotiation scholars, businesspeople, managers, and anyone else who finds themselves in a negotiation.
This article aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing literature on the hackathon p... more This article aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing literature on the hackathon phenomenon to offer scholars a common ground for future research and managers and practitioners research-based guidelines on best planning and running a hackathon. A review of the most relevant literature on hackathons was conducted to serve as the research basis for our integrative model and guidelines. This article synthesizes the research on hackathons to offer comprehensible guidelines for practitioners while also providing questions for future hackathon researchers. We differentiate between the different design characteristics of hackathons while noting their advantages and disadvantages, discuss tools and methodologies for successful hackathon setup and execution step-by-step, and provide recommendations to encourage project continuity.
The literature on behavioral decision-making and negotiations to date usually advocates first-mov... more The literature on behavioral decision-making and negotiations to date usually advocates first-mover advantage in distributive negotiations, and bases this preference on the anchoring heuristic. In the following paper, we suggest that the preference for moving first vs. moving second in negotiations may not be as clear-cut as presumed, especially in situations characterized by information asymmetry between negotiating counterparts. In Study 1, we examined people's initiation preferences and found that unless taught otherwise, people intuitively often prefer to move second. In Studies 2--4, we experimentally tested the suggested advantage of moving second, and demonstrated that in information-asymmetry scenarios – when one party has perfect background information and the other has none --- it is actually preferable for both counterparts not to give the first offer while negotiating. We discuss the implications of our findings on the field of negotiation and decision-making, and ...
Uploads
Papers by Yossi Maaravi