Introduction
This week’s MSLD632 Blog
centers on a very important topic in the dealings of a manager / leader,
negotiations. Let me be more specific, deception in negotiations.
Why focus on deception in negotiations as a topic of a blog? Beside that the
topic is an academic requirement, understanding deception in negotiation is a
must have tool for any manager / leader. Hoch & Kunreuther, 2001 warn about
this concerning negotiations “Deception of some kind is inherent part of human
interaction.” (p. 189) and we can probably all agree that we need to be aware
of deception tactics and what elements in negotiation should sharpen our senses
to defend our ‘good sense’ reputation that we believe we have.
Common Areas Where Deception Tactics are used
All
of us have likely at one time or another negotiated for the price of something like
a vehicle, house, new or used, wages etc. It’s also very likely we
probably fell victim to deception in negotiation at some time or other, and if
you have not it is only a matter of time or your memory fails you. Becoming
aware of the elements where negotiators will use deceptive tactics is a basic necessity
if one wishes to reduce the probability of being deceived. Hoch &
Kunreuther, 2001 (pp. 190-191) provides these elements to consider:
1.
Reservation Prices – Probably the most lied about element in
negotiations is the “bottom-line”. For example, if you selling your house you
know what the minimum price is you’ll take for the house, but the first time
your asked what your minimum price is your likely not to reveal what your true
minimum price is.
2.
What the Interests is in – If you go to a car lot do you go
up to the car your most interested in? A useful tactic my father taught me was
to go to a car that is not one that you’ll buy. That will set the mood for you
to not get to excited and will be a good way to begin the negotiation with a
cool head and not get carried away by the excitement of buying a new car.
3.
True Intentions – Very closely related to masking what you’re
really interested in with a future action in play. Such as when you are
negotiating for that car and you state “Well, I’m not really sure this is a
good enough deal. The dealer across town came in lower than you…perhaps I’ll
just go back over to that dealer.”
4.
Material Facts – For most, fabricating material facts is off
limits in negotiations. This can be a deal breaker in negotiations. If the car
dealership states the sticker price of the car is 30K and it is discovered
later in the negotiation that the actual price on the sticker of the car shows
25K, who would continue to negotiate?
Knowing what facets in negotiations
can be played deceptively is a good way of preparing negotiations. There are
others such as, reflect on what the minimum
requirements are you are willingly to accept and understand that with each
negotiation that your reputation is at stake (Hoch
& Kunreuther, 2001, pg. 179) and guard against deception and take deception head
on “Expose the dirty trick for what it is…point out that everyone’s interests
will be better served if you approach the problem as honest people who are
amendable to reason.” (McKay & Fanning, 2009, 187).
My Own Personal Experience with Deceptive
Tactics
At work, my personal
reputation is very important to me. My method of negotiation is intended to
always be sincere and upfront with no hidden agendas. Guess that would classify
me as a “Nice and Reasonable” negotiator (Hoch & Kunreuther, 2001, pg.
181).
Honestly, the only time I do not fulfill the role of the nice
and reasonable negotiator is when away from work and only in special
circumstances where using deceptive tactics is the only recourse to achieving a
fair deal. Negotiating the price on an automobile in a dealership where their tactics
are detected to be deceptive would be an example. Other examples include
negotiations when the opposition wants conflict more than they want to
negotiate. Unfortunately this is a frequent occurrence in some of my very
personal relationships. Let me tell you a recent story of mine where the negotiation
outcome was positively affected by the MSLD program.
Recently, a co-worker came to me and solicited a trade of personnel
between our teams. This individual has a reputation for having hidden agendas
and using deceptive tactics. The trade sounded intriguing. I knew the
reputation of this individual and experienced the short end of the stick on a
previous deal with him, so I proceeded with caution. My first question was why he
was interested in making this trade. He sold the idea as a ‘win-win’ for both
of us, but based on his reputation I wasn’t sold. My guy was a known commodity.
I never met his guy, so I told him I needed to interview him first before I
would consider. He became offended. His immediate response was defensive…he blurted
out “You don’t trust me?” I took McKay & Fanning’s (2009) advice about exposing
the dirty trick for what is was (p. 187) and reminded him of the ‘raw’ deal he
bestowed upon me previously and that before I made another deal with him I
would be more careful. He backed off and became reasonable.
To make a long story short, I interviewed the prospective
trade the next day and as it turns out I figured out there was a hidden agenda.
His guy was not his ‘type’ of guy, meaning their personal values didn’t align
very well. His guy was very introverted and had some strange mannerisms which I
knew would bothersome to my coworker. What I saw as his main attribute was that
he was extremely bright and sharp mentally. The best part was that when we
talked about fault isolation procedures his eyes lit up like a 4th
of July Celebration! He met my criteria and he would likely be better suited
for the job then they guy I was going to trade him for.
Still, I was patient. What was the rush? Seeking out my
coworker to tell him I would do the trade was not my priority. A day or two
passed by and my co-worker approached me and asked me what was up with the
trade proposal? When he heard me say the trade would be conditional, he asked
what the terms would be. Terms of the trade would be that we would do an
exchange for a one week trial period and that both parties would have to be
satisfied with the trade. Of course he would be, he had worked with my guy
previously and was why he asked for him. So, guess you could say that masking
my true intentions were in play here. Bottom line was he was put on notice that
negotiations with me were possible, but bull rushing me to a decision was not
going to happen again.
Summary
Lessons learned about negotiations
in the MSLD program have been immensely helpful to my team and to me personally.
Gone is the “Cream Puff: Will make concessions regardless of what you do” (Hoch
& Kunreuther, 2001, pg. 181) and now present is a more confident “Nice and Reasonable”
(p. 181) negotiator!
References:
Hoch,
S. J., & Kunreuther, H. C. (2001). Wharton
on making decisions. (1st edition.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
McKay, M., Davis, M. & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages: The communication skills book. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger
Publications, Inc.
