Rabia Mustafa* and Sharafat A. Chaudhry**
Chapter 8 of the book ‘Getting to Yes Negotiating an Agreements without Giving in” is all about using the dirty tricks in negotiation and taming the hard bargainer.
In negotiations, it is common for negotiators to use tactics such as lies, psychological abuse, and pressure tactics to gain a gain. These tactics can be illegal, unethical, or unpleasant. If a tricky bargaining tactic is used, people typically respond in two ways: either by putting up with it or responding in kind. The first response is to give in, hoping for appeasement and not to ask for more. This can lead to a negotiation break-off or a one-sided proposal. However, these tactics are illegitimate as they fail the test of reciprocity and are designed for one side only. To counter them, principled negotiation about the negotiating process is essential. By examining the legitimacy of the principle that the proposal reflects, one can counter these tactics and achieve a more effective negotiation outcome.
To negotiate the rules of the game, follow these three steps: recognize the tactic, raise the issue explicitly, and question its legitimacy and desirability. Recognize deception, discomfort, and lockdown tactics to neutralize them. Discuss the tactic with the other side to make it less effective and avoid alienation. The third step focuses on procedure, aiming to produce a wise agreement efficiently and amicably. The method remains the same, focusing on procedure rather than substance and the procedure as described in the starting chapter:
- Separate the people from the problem: Avoid personal attacks to prevent defensiveness and lingering resentment. Focus on the issue at hand instead of criticizing the person’s character or integrity.
- Focus on interests, not positions: Understand the underlying reasons behind someone’s stance rather than fixating on their stated position. This helps in identifying mutual goals and fostering a cooperative environment.
- Invent options for mutual gain: Suggest alternative solutions that benefit both parties. Create new possibilities that address the interests of everyone involved.
- Insist on using objective criteria: Use impartial standards to evaluate options and make decisions. This helps ensure fairness and prevents bias or manipulation.
- Turn to your BATNA as a last resort: If the negotiation is not progressing in good faith, be prepared to walk away and pursue your Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement. This can sometimes prompt the other party to return to the negotiation table with a more cooperative attitude.
Some common tricky tactics
Tricky tactics in negotiation fall into three categories: deliberate deception, psychological warfare, and positional pressure tactics. It’s important to be prepared to handle all three. The text provides examples of each type and explains how principled negotiation can be used to counteract these tactics.
Deliberate Deception
Phony Facts: This involves making false statements about relevant information, such as claiming a product has been used minimally when it hasn’t. To counter this, individuals should be separated from the issues at hand. Verify statements independently rather than relying on trust, and ensure negotiations aren’t based solely on verbal assurances.
Ambiguous Authority: Sometimes, negotiators might pretend to have full authority to make decisions when they don’t. This tactic aims to secure concessions by making you believe an agreement is final, only to have them claim they need further approval. To handle this, clarify the level of authority of the other party early on. If an agreement is treated as a draft, insist on reciprocity or a clear understanding that nothing is final until everything is agreed upon.
Dubious Intentions: This involves misrepresenting one’s commitment to comply with agreements. For instance, a party might promise child support payments but might not follow through. To address this, build mechanisms into the agreement to ensure compliance, like using contingencies that require actions if promises aren’t kept. This makes it harder for the other party to back out of their commitments.
Psychological Warfare
Stressful Situations: Negotiations can be influenced by creating uncomfortable physical conditions, such as holding meetings in noisy or unpleasant environments. If you feel stressed by the setting, address the issue openly. Suggest changes to the environment or a break if needed to ensure the negotiation is conducted in a more comfortable setting.
Personal Attacks: The other side might use verbal or non-verbal attacks to unsettle you, such as criticizing your appearance or questioning your competence. Recognize these attacks for what they are and respond by addressing them directly. Bringing the issue into the open can reduce their impact and prevent them from recurring.
Good-Guy/Bad-Guy Routine: This tactic involves two negotiators, where one takes a tough stance and the other appears more sympathetic. The goal is to manipulate you into agreeing to a less favorable position. Recognize this routine and respond by asking for principled justifications for their positions rather than being swayed by the apparent sympathy of the “good guy.”
Threats: Threats are used to pressure you into making decisions quickly. They can escalate tensions and lead to counter threats. Instead of reacting to threats, provide warnings about the consequences of not reaching an agreement, and outline your actions in a way that focuses on your interests without being coercive. Ensure your responses are based on principles rather than threats.
Positional Pressure Tactics
Refusal to Negotiate: Sometimes one side will refuse to engage in negotiations to gain leverage. Recognize this as a tactic to use their position as a bargaining chip. Explore their reasons for refusal, and propose alternative methods of negotiation, like third-party mediation or written communications, to facilitate dialogue.
Extreme Demands: Starting with unrealistically high demands to lower expectations is a common tactic. It can undermine their credibility or kill the deal if seen as unreasonable. Counter by asking for justifications for their extreme demands and work to bring the negotiation back to a more reasonable basis.
Escalating Demands: This involves increasing demands incrementally after concessions have been made or reopening previously settled issues. Recognize this tactic and respond by taking breaks to reassess and focus on principled negotiation to prevent being drawn into an endless cycle of concessions.
Lock-In Tactics: These involve making extreme commitments to avoid yielding, such as public statements that commit to certain positions. These tactics are designed to force you into a corner. Recognize and address these commitments as tactical maneuvers, and focus on negotiating based on principles rather than being swayed by the commitment itself.
Hardhearted Partner: A negotiator might blame a rigid colleague for not agreeing to your requests, using this as an excuse. Address the issue by seeking agreement on principles and trying to engage directly with the decision-maker, if possible.
Calculated Delay: Delaying decisions to leverage better timing is a tactic often used to apply psychological pressure. Make the delay tactics explicit, and establish objective deadlines or conditions to move the negotiation forward.
Take It or Leave It: Presenting a final offer with no room for negotiation is a common tactic. Initially ignore this offer or change the subject to introduce alternative solutions. If addressing it directly, discuss what’s at stake if no agreement is reached and find ways to allow for flexibility or adjustments.
Avoiding Victimhood
Reflect on whether the tactics you use align with your own values and would be acceptable if used against you. Assess if your actions would be appropriate if publicly known. Approach negotiations with integrity and be prepared to counter tricky tactics by staying principled and assertive.
Continue…
* The writer is a Linguist and Senior Research Fellow at the School for Law and Development
** The writer is an Advocate, an internationally accredited Mediator, and the author of Law and Development
