15 NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES

To carry out a business negotiation it is necessary to know, identify and

implement one or more of the 15 negotiation strategies in order to obtain a
better result. It is worth remembering that each negotiation is different and
therefore it is recommended that you avoid always using the same negotiation
strategy scheme.

The above is based on the fact that no two clients are the same and each of
them requires a certain treatment. The negotiation strategies are:

LIMITED AUTHORITY AGENT

This strategy refers to the limits that both parties have during the negotiation
process. The authority that both parties have must be equitable, that is, both
parties determine agreements for the common good and are determined by
them because the benefits are different but for both parties. In this strategy we
find that:

1. Never allow yourself or anyone else to negotiate on your behalf with limited
authority.

2. You should never begin a negotiation with someone who completely lacks
authority.

3. Negotiators have little or no authority to make concessions.

4. The worst person you can negotiate for is yourself.

5. You should not get too emotionally involved as it is very easy to lose
perspective.

6. When you conduct your own negotiations you have total authority and it is,
therefore, possible to make quick decisions without making appropriate use
of time to analyze them. 1

MONEY AT STAKE

This strategy points out the central axis of the negotiation and justifies it, since
the purpose of carrying out a negotiation is to benefit two parties who have a
specific interest and this interest is money. That is why when carrying out the
1
MAI Ruíz López Carlos Alberto “NEGOTIATION PROCESSES AND TECHNIQUES”. Retrieved on
September 9, 2015 from: http://es.slideshare.net/cruizlopez/ceso-y-estrategias-de-negociacion
negotiation, all necessary measures are taken so that during the development
of the points described in the negotiation, the interests are not harmed, carrying
out the successful completion of the negotiation and thus benefiting the
interested parties.

ESTABLISHED PRACTICE

During the negotiation, two types of practices are carried out, the first are the
actions carried out during the negotiation process and the second are the
actions stipulated to successfully carry out said negotiation. In both cases,
these actions are established and used in order to ensure the correct
performance of the negotiation, providing exact knowledge of the needs and
interests and ensuring optimal results for both parties.

THE CRUMB

This tactic consists of asking for some additional detail of what is being defined
in the negotiation, that is, an additional plus. Mostly this strategy is used by the
client, so the negotiator must be prepared to respond to this request. It is worth
mentioning that this strategy is carried out but the client is told that this plus will
have an additional cost to what has already been negotiated.

THE DOGGY

This point focuses on “sweetening” the client, that is, the negotiator determines
the mutual interests but highlights the advantages that will bring more to the
client than to him, this makes the client “fall in love” with what was negotiated,
agreeing to pay what that the businessman has told him that it is reasonable for
what he is offering.

ACT AND ACCEPT CONSEQUENCES

Negotiators may act on their own behalf, or on behalf of others. In this second
case, there may be only one representative for each institution or group, or
more than one. After having negotiated with the opponent, the decision is made
and the next step is to act and accept both the advantages and the
consequences that this decision will bring.

However, during the negotiation or during the active development of what is

stipulated in the negotiation, certain inconveniences may arise and for this you
must know how to act in the face of a risk:
 Ignore and accept its consequences .
o When the economic impact is very small, even if it is very frequent, we
can assume it as another cost of our business. An example could be that
glass or plates are broken in a restaurant.
o When the economic impact is moderate and we consider the probability
low. For example: Faced with a regulation that doubtfully affects us and
complying with it would be extremely cumbersome and complicated. If
the maximum penalty is $600.00, we can decide to ignore it, and if we
are unlucky and are finally penalized we are willing to accept the
consequences.
 Delete it . Sometimes thanks to a change in our activities or work
procedures that do not substantially affect our business, we can eliminate a
risk. At the restaurant, to avoid mayonnaise poisoning, we decided to stop
preparing it and only use the packaged one.
 Reduce the probability . A major risk in a restaurant is a fire in the kitchen.
We can reduce this by replacing gas with electricity and ensuring that the
installation complies with safety regulations.
 Reduce the consequences: Take preventive measures so that if the event
occurs, its impact is reduced. In the restaurant we should not store
flammable products near the stove.

 Have a contingency plan prepared: Know what we are going to do in case

that eventuality occurs. In the restaurant: have fire extinguishers and make
sure that all employees know how to act in case of fire.
 Transfer the risk in whole or in art to a third party: we can take out
insurance that covers this eventuality. It should be noted that not all risks are
insurable, the most common insurances are the following:
o Assets : Those that cover the loss that we may suffer in an asset
 (building, vehicle, machinery, etc.) in the event of certain eventualities:
fire, theft...
o Civil liability: For damages caused to third parties.
o Personal : Accidents, life, illness. The future of a small business is often
strongly tied to its owner and can be seriously affected if the owner is
absent or incapacitated.
o Credit insurance . It covers you if a client fails to pay all or part of what
is owed. It is normally considered a type of property insurance.

In any case, in the business there will be many risks that will not be insurable,
such as the loss of a customer, the entry of new competitors or the
obsolescence of products, etc., but we must be prepared to be able to act and
accept the consequences. 2

THE TIMELY EXIT

Timely exit may include some disappointment, procrastination, and faking it. He
tries to make the other negotiator believe that he has stopped thinking about the
matter when in reality that is not the case.

The negotiator wants others to feel that his position is strong. They do not agree
with your point of view. To make them change, appear to withdraw. What
matters most in this case is that the negotiator masters time and can return to
the negotiation at the right time. Perhaps the strength of his position has not
changed at all.

However, others may consider that a definitive withdrawal would be much more
damaging than making concessions today. Therefore, something very important
is true here: "The power to negotiate consists of what a person has and what
others believe they have."

The negotiator seeks, therefore, to convince the opponent that withdrawal from
the negotiation is real, but providing for a mechanism that allows talks to be
resumed if the opponents do not accept the proposed terms, that is, without

2
losing face. According to Iklé and Leites, it is a tactic that negotiators use to
3
modify the opponent's estimate of their point of resistance.

GOOD GUY – BAD GUY

One of the negotiators represents one of the parties: one of them behaves in a
very harsh and intransigent way, and appears intractable, threatening,
demanding, without the slightest interest in making concessions, while the other
tries to gain the trust of the opponent, appears understanding, cordial, and tries
to convince him to accept his proposal, before his partner takes the reins of the
negotiation since he appears softer with a manipulative purpose and the
intention of making his adversary give in.

In the opinion of Maddux (1992), this tactic, also known as the “good guy/bad
guy” tactic, is used internationally and is commonly used in different
negotiation processes .

Where the possible tactics to use in a competitive negotiation are very varied
and can basically be classified into those that affect credibility (threats,
promises, commitments), those that play with the staging (good guy/bad guy,
stinging) , or with emotional elements (intimidation).

This strategy is a tactic of psychological manipulation in which two characters

play the roles alternately, highlighting that the antipathy caused by the first of
them is evident from the outset, where the falsity of the other is detected until
much later. This tactic is fearfully effective against weak characters and
improvised negotiators; However, we must be wary of it because it must be
4
used with varying degrees of subtlety, appropriate to ensure its camouflage.

HIGH AND LOWER AUTHORITY

It refers to the person who for a moment makes a decision but is not very strong
in sticking to it and can very easily change his or her mind in a matter of
minutes, mostly this person is the client, making the high authority at that
moment the negotiator. However, in few cases the roles change and the

4
negotiator is the lower authority and the client is the lower authority. Therefore,
facing a higher authority can give the following results if taken into account:

 They know less about the details. They are less prepared.
 They have a propensity to want to demonstrate their ability in decision-
making.
 They don't want to waste their valuable time on small matters.

In any case, when using this tactic, you must be careful not to provoke a
breakdown in the negotiation or a stalemate, unless you have new alternatives
to redirect the negotiation. People tend to increase their aspirations if they
achieve success, in the same way they tend to decrease them when failure
occurs. The level of aspirations compromises the image of the person. Great
success leads to considerably increased aspirations. A failure leads to a
tremendous loss.

Our opponent opens the negotiation with an extremely high request, much more
than we had anticipated. We are faced with the alternative of retreating or trying
to catch up. This tactic allows for good results in negotiations on subjective
issues that are difficult to objectify and value. Its objective is to tempt us to
make a much higher offer than we would have otherwise made, than we had
planned to make, which it can achieve if we believe that the firmness of its
request is great. By adopting an extreme position it forces us, or tries to force
us, to get closer to its objectives.

ACTIVE PARTICIPATION

Active participation is based on the equity of effort and interest provided by the
parties interested in the negotiation, at this point the responsibilities, control and
coordination of both parties are observed to obtain the expected results. With
both parties actively participating, an incredible synergy is created with such
teamwork that only a win-win solution is achieved.

That strategy is the Democratic Design Principle, which contrasts with the
Bureaucratic Principle, whose basic premise is that the control and coordination
of tasks must be carried out at least at a level above the person who executes
them, which creates competition and fragmentation.

Accepting active participation and self-organization as principles of change

processes implies that it is not completely clear in advance what the results will
be, the point at which it will be reached. That is, leaders and consultants have to
experience a certain degree of uncertainty about the process and results, which
requires flexibility and a facilitative attitude. However, it is also true that final
decisions are usually made by formal leaders.

Therefore, it is important to clarify this aspect when the participation of interest

groups is requested, and they must understand their role in decision-making.
But active participation also means that people feel invited to contribute, and
that their contributions are taken seriously. The only way to achieve this is to
involve them in some way in the planning process. One way to do this is to
create a design team early in the change process.5

UNDERSTAND, FEEL, FIND YOURSELF

This strategy is based on three essential elements: understand, feel and find
yourself. Where to understand is to be clear about what is being negotiated, to
feel is the atmosphere and sensation that exists during the negotiation, and to
find oneself is to ensure that what is negotiated satisfies our needs. Mostly this
principle applies the need to make the seller or buyer feel their own needs and
motivations to help them better understand and thus find and define their
interests.

THE ASPAVIENT

The fuss refers to the astonishment or admiration that the negotiation can cause
in the client on the part of the negotiator. This is because the negotiator handles
the negotiation in a favorable manner and therefore the client lets himself be
carried away by what the negotiator offers him.

5
BUDGET CONSTRAINTS

This strategy indicates to the negotiator that the expected budget should not
always be lowered just to win a client and thereby close the deal, since by doing
so, instead of winning, one loses monetarily and causes the client to do the
same thing again in the future. same in an upcoming negotiation. This strategy
is taken as the art of negotiation.

RELUCTANT NEGOTIATOR

This is a strategy used to get the other party to make concessions. Parties tend
to take extreme positions and press for them without considering the interests of
the other party. The rival side will often respond with equally "tough" strategies,
resulting in both sides becoming exhausted and risking becoming mired in an
intractable conflict.

THE DECISION

The decision is one of the most difficult strategies to follow, since the success or
failure of the negotiation depends 100% on it, and in order to make a decision
you must first analyze the pros and cons of the points discussed in the
negotiation to finally make a decision that meets the needs.