Negotiation styles: The impact on bargaining transactions

Dispute Resolution Journal, Feb-Apr 2003 by Craver, Charles B

Despite the fact that effective bargainers generally hope to attain as much as they can for their side, they are not "win-lose" negotiators. They recognize that they do not necessarily benefit from imposing bad terms on adversaries. All other factors being equal, they hope to increase opponent satisfaction as long as it does not necessitate significant concessions by them. And when they conclude bargaining, they don't judge their success by how poorly their opponents have done. They ask, instead, whether they like what they got, realizing that if they attained their objectives, they were successful.

Proficient negotiators do not seek to enhance opponent returns merely for altruistic reasons. They do so because this approach allows them to advance their clients' interests. They have to offer adversaries sufficiently generous terms to induce them to reach agreements. They also want to be sure that adversaries will honor their agreements, since adversaries who experience post-agreement "buyers remorse" may try to back out of the deal. Finally, they know that it is likely that they will encounter the same opponents in the future. If the opponents remember them as courteous and professional negotiators, their future bargaining interactions also are likely to be successful.

People tend to work more diligently to satisfy the needs of opponents they like personally.21 Overtly competitive bargainers are rarely perceived as likeable. They exude competition and aggression, and they generate similar responses from opponents.26 Since seemingly cooperative negotiators are more enjoyable to interact with, they find it easier to induce unsuspecting opponents to lower their guard, behave more cooperatively, and make greater concessions.27

Eclectic negotiators can be characterized as competitive problem-solvers. Their style is a composite of the cooperative problem-solver and the competitive adversarial. These negotiators have competitive objectives (maximum client returns), but they endeavor to accomplish their goals through problem-solving strategies.28 This may partially explain why Profs. Williams and Schneider found more effective cooperative problem-solvers than effective competitive adversarial bargainers. It is likely that many competitive negotiators were so successful in their use of "problemsolving" tactics that they induced opponents to characterize them as cooperative rather than competitive in the dichotomous system employed in the Williams and Schneider studies.

Conclusion

While most experts classify negotiators as cooperative problem-solvers or competitive adversarial bargainers, the most effective negotiators may be those who employ a hybrid competitive problem-solving style. This style incorporates the optimal traits from both classifications. Negotiators who employ this style may be better able to expand the overall pie and maximize adversaries' returns once they achieve their own objectives. These negotiators have a cooperative attitude and behave professionally. They realize that courteous conduct is more likely to generate positive moods in bargaining participants that increase the probability of cooperative behavior and the joint returns.