NUPUR:

Flinch/Krunch:

When negotiators receive opening offers from others, they frequently generate consecutive opening
offers through the use of the flinch or krunch. As soon as they receive their counterpart’s offer, they
pull back and look shocked, physically indicating their clear disappointment with the terms
proposed. The flinch negotiation tactic is a physical reaction to communicate shock, dismay or
disbelief at what you just heard. Sometimes it is involuntary; your mouth falls open. But often this
negotiation technique is more about communicating a message of exasperation.

If their flinch/krunch is effective, they often generate additional opening offers from the persons on
the other side. The flinch/krunch can be especially effective when employed by individuals who
appear to be sincerely shocked by the inadequacy of the other party’s initial position. This technique
can be similarly employed during later discussions to demonstrate the total inadequacy of
counterpart concessions. After new positions are articulated, if the recipients of those offers can
openly demonstrate how unacceptable those terms are, they may be able to induce the offerors to
make additional, unreciprocated position changes. Persons who encounter this tactic should not
allow the actors to induce them to make consecutive concessions. They should stay with their
originally-articulated positions, and ask the people on the other side what they are prepared to
offer. They should make it clear that no further position changes will be forthcoming without
reciprocal movement by the other side.

Technique's Risks

 Best used by "good actors"

 Can create hostility and negative reactions

 Other party may not "fall" for this technique

 Other party may start asking probing questions

KAPIL

As explained by Nupur, a Flinch/ Crunch is a response to an offer that does not come in the form of a
counter-offer. It can also be called as the Tactical Probe. It is perhaps one of the oldest negotiation
tactics in the world. Most everybody uses it at one time or another, from our everyday interaction at
a store to the most high-level negotiation. A Crunch is designed to encourage the other side to move
off their current position and make a concession, or to explore and generate creative options.
However, it must not be overdone, and should be respectful of the relationship and situation.

Using the crunch technique is actually very simple. When the other side of the table presents you
with a proposal that is not acceptable to you, you need to tell them “You’ve got to do better than
that”. It’s really that simple. When you say this, the other side will then have to determine if they are
going to be willing to make further concessions to you. More often than not, in order to keep the
negotiations moving forward, the other side will come back to you with an improved offer.

DIKSHA
How To Combat This Technique

As powerful as the crunch technique is, one needs to realize that the other side of the table can use
it against you. When this happens, one needs to first realize that it’s happening and then take
defensive measures against it. It can be defended by causing the other side to respond to your
position instead of you having to change it. One shouldn’t respond to a Crunch with a concession;
otherwise it is considered a unilateral concession. Be careful not to bid against themselves by
announcing another offer. When the flinch negotiation tactic is used, the best counter is to flinch
back with an equally assertive or greater Crunch. You could remain silent and look to the other side
to articulate its opening position. More questions could be asked. It could be asked from that party if
they are contemplating an opening offer of their own or ask them what they think would be the
appropriate price.

Now Kapil and I will be giving a small demonstration of how this technique is used.

Diksha-buyer

Kapil-seller

We’ll be negotiating for an acceptable satisfactory price per ton of kiwis.

K- Hello, how are you?

D- I am good, thanks. How are you doing?

K- Good, thank you. What can I help you with today?

D- I wish to buy kiwis for my supermarket

K- Do you have any specific amount or price in mind?

D- I can pay you 200 pounds for one ton

K- How many tonnes would you need of that

D- Just one for now actually

K- Okay, that’s quite low for what our typical price is. We wouldn’t be able to offer at that price. If
you have any idea of a better price you could offer just because the demand is quite high at the
moment because of dengue. Can you offer any more than 200?

D- What would be a better price in your mind?

K- We are looking for around 700 pounds which is really the going rate right now.

D- Silence, disappointment, shake head – 5 secs disappointed sound, expression

We can not really afford 700

K- Okay. Like I said the supply is quite limited at the moment; we don’t really dip below 700. What

Is your price range? What is the maximum rate that you can go to?
D- Well, I can pay you 200. Silence. We can’t do much more than that unfortunately. [Do
calculations, acting]

K- Okay, I don’t think we can take 200 too because that would be way low, we would be making a
loss then. Would you consider 650?

D- Silence for 5 seconds. So what’s your delivery policy?

K-

So, as you have seen, the idea behind a flinch is that if there are two positions, and there is a
proposal from the seller to the buyer, the buyer is going to react in either verbal or non-verbal
response that is going to make the other party reconsider that proposal as its not acceptable.

There was the first element of silence & disappointment at 700. Then when I proposed 200 again,
silence was met with silence. However, later on, the seller came down to 650 without any particular
benefit being offered to him. There was a huge expectation gap between the price offered by the
buyer and seller, but because of the tactic employed by buyer, seller didn’t really put it down
assertively that 200 is way below the mark and absolutely not going to work for them.

When first proposed 200, seller should have given more of shock, indicating that its completely
unacceptable, instead of just saying that it was quite low.

Furthermore, to defend against this technique, the seller could have asked more questions. They
should first ask what the problem is: are other sellers offering the same product and the same
service at a better price? Seller could have also negotiated the quantity bought, that 700 is for one
ton, if the buyer were to buy ten tons, then seller could drop the price by 50

If you pay cash upfront, I could do 630

So, in conclusion, A person should not go into a negotiation without asking himself or herself, ‘What
will I do if the other party says ‘You’ve got to better than that?’’