4.2 Tactics and Countertactics in Distributive Negotiations

Negotiators often employ hardball tactics like extreme anchoring and artificial deadlines to gain an advantage. Recognizing these strategies is crucial for developing effective countertactics, such as ignoring extreme anchors and challenging arbitrary time constraints.

Skillful questioning and selective information sharing are powerful tools in distributive bargaining. By asking probing questions and strategically framing concessions, negotiators can uncover hidden interests and influence perceptions, leading to more favorable outcomes.

Distributive Bargaining Tactics and Countertactics

Common hardball tactics in bargaining

Top images from around the web for Common hardball tactics in bargaining

• 

  School Librarian in Action: Library Bluff Game View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Opinion Forum » Supercommittee Deadlines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Calling the Bluff: The Real “Boom and Bust” of Poker View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  School Librarian in Action: Library Bluff Game View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Opinion Forum » Supercommittee Deadlines View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Common hardball tactics in bargaining

• 

  School Librarian in Action: Library Bluff Game View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Opinion Forum » Supercommittee Deadlines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Calling the Bluff: The Real “Boom and Bust” of Poker View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  School Librarian in Action: Library Bluff Game View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Opinion Forum » Supercommittee Deadlines View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Extreme anchoring
  • Makes an aggressive first offer to anchor the negotiation in their favor
  • Shifts the bargaining range and influences the other party's perception of a fair outcome
• Claiming limited authority
  • Asserts they lack the power to make concessions or agree to terms
  • Allows the negotiator to avoid making commitments or granting concessions
• Artificial deadlines
  • Sets arbitrary time constraints to pressure the other party into making a decision
  • Creates a sense of urgency and can lead to hasty concessions
• Take-it-or-leave-it offers
  • Presents a final offer and refuses to engage in further negotiation
  • Puts pressure on the other party to accept the terms or risk an impasse
• Bluffing and misrepresentation
  • Makes false statements or exaggerates facts to gain an advantage
  • Can mislead the other party and distort their perception of the situation (inflating projected sales figures)

Countertactics for aggressive negotiations

• Ignore extreme anchors
  • Recognizes and dismisses aggressive opening offers as a tactic
  • Counters with a more reasonable offer based on objective criteria (market data, industry standards)
• Verify authority claims
  • Asks for proof of the other party's limited authority
  • Seeks to negotiate with the decision-maker directly (requesting a meeting with a supervisor)
• Challenge artificial deadlines
  • Questions the basis for the time constraint and its consequences
  • Proposes alternative timelines or emphasizes the importance of a well-considered agreement
• Reframe take-it-or-leave-it offers
  • Treats the offer as a starting point for further discussion
  • Highlights the potential benefits of exploring mutually beneficial options (long-term partnership)
• Verify information and assumptions
  • Asks for evidence to support the other party's claims
  • Conducts independent research to validate facts and uncover inconsistencies (checking references, market research)

Questioning for interest discovery

• Open-ended questions
  • Encourages the other party to share more information about their needs and priorities
  • "What are the most important factors for your organization in this negotiation?"
• Probing questions
  • Seeks to clarify and deepen understanding of the other party's statements
  • "You mentioned that quality is a key concern. Can you elaborate on what specific quality standards you require?"
• Hypothetical questions
  • Explores potential scenarios and gauges the other party's receptiveness to different options
  • "If we were able to offer a 10% discount, how would that impact your decision?"
• Asking for priorities
  • Requests that the other party rank or weigh the importance of various issues
  • "Among price, delivery time, and product features, which is the most critical factor for you?"

Selective information for perception influence

• Anchoring with favorable information
  • Shares data or examples that support your preferred outcome or position (case studies, testimonials)
  • Establishes a favorable anchor point and influences the other party's expectations
• Framing concessions strategically
  • Presents concessions as significant sacrifices to increase their perceived value
  • Emphasizes the benefits the other party gains from your concessions (exclusive access, customization)
• Highlighting common interests
  • Identifies and emphasizes shared goals or areas of agreement
  • Creates a collaborative atmosphere and encourages reciprocity (mutual desire for a long-term partnership)
• Providing relevant comparisons
  • Shares industry benchmarks or similar deals to justify your position
  • Demonstrates the fairness and competitiveness of your offer (citing average market prices)