Home > Learn > Negotiation > Effective Negotiation Strategies Part I: Competitive Approach
Effective Negotiation Strategies Part I: Competitive Approach
Success in negotiation often turns on having the right strategy.
How do you decide on strategy?
In negotiation literature, there are basically two approaches to negotiation: the “competitive” (or positional) approach and the “integrative” ( or interest-based) approach. The former assumes that each party will compete for the most he or she can get of a limited resource. The latter assumes that if both parties work together, they can maximize available resources so that each gets more of what they want.
Both approaches have lots of merit and both are used, in different ways at different times, by all good negotiators. The difficult question we all struggle with is when to use one or the other, and how?
Competitive negotiation skills focus on pressuring the other negotiator to make concessions that will maximize your own position. It involves staking out firm positions at the highest possible end of the acceptable bargaining range and planning ways of convincing your opponent to acquiesce.
Such an approach, known as a “win-lose” orientation in negotiation terminology, relies on the use of such tactics as:
Making high opening demands
Making smaller concessions than the other negotiator
Not having authority to finalize the deal (think of the car salesperson who has to “check with the manager”)
Relying on bluster, false demands, or different perceptions of the true value of the thing being discussed
Such tactics can succeed in achieving a “good” result in a negotiation, and can be both appropriate and effective in some situations. Even if you do not like to think of yourself as a competitive negotiator, there may be times when you will need to use these tactics against someone else who is using them; otherwise you will be taken advantage of.
Everyone should be familiar with these kinds of tactics and be prepared to either “call them” (“I know you are playing the old good-cop bad-cop routine and it will not work with me”) , convince the other side that other tactics will be more effective (“let’s stop arguing over who is right and focus on what you really want and why. What is really important to you?”) or, as a last resort, to use them in return.
Anyone employing a distributive negotiation strategy must understand its consequences: it does not endear you to the other person. These kinds of tactics are not advisable if the negotiation anticipates an on-going relationship, such as employer-employee, between neighbours or separating spouses who have children. These strategies do not build trust and are likely to lead to anger, frustration and impasse in the negotiation. And they are not guaranteed to be effective; indeed there is lots of research to suggest that the use of distributive negotiation strategies produce, on the whole, less satisfactory agreements than those reached using more cooperative strategies.
In another article we will discuss how and when to use win-win, interest-based bargaining strategy.
Effective Negotiation Strategies Part I:
Competitive Approach
Success in negotiation often turns on having the right strategy.
How do you decide on strategy?
In negotiation literature, there are basically two approaches to negotiation: the “competitive” (or positional) approach and the “integrative” ( or interest-based) approach. The former assumes that each party will compete for the most he or she can get of a limited resource. The latter assumes that if both parties work together, they can maximize available resources so that each gets more of what they want.
Both approaches have lots of merit and both are used, in different ways at different times, by all good negotiators. The difficult question we all struggle with is when to use one or the other, and how?
Competitive negotiation skills focus on pressuring the other negotiator to make concessions that will maximize your own position. It involves staking out firm positions at the highest possible end of the acceptable bargaining range and planning ways of convincing your opponent to acquiesce.
Such an approach, known as a “win-lose” orientation in negotiation terminology, relies on the use of such tactics as:
Such tactics can succeed in achieving a “good” result in a negotiation, and can be both appropriate and effective in some situations. Even if you do not like to think of yourself as a competitive negotiator, there may be times when you will need to use these tactics against someone else who is using them; otherwise you will be taken advantage of.
Everyone should be familiar with these kinds of tactics and be prepared to either “call them” (“I know you are playing the old good-cop bad-cop routine and it will not work with me”) , convince the other side that other tactics will be more effective (“let’s stop arguing over who is right and focus on what you really want and why. What is really important to you?”) or, as a last resort, to use them in return.
Anyone employing a distributive negotiation strategy must understand its consequences: it does not endear you to the other person. These kinds of tactics are not advisable if the negotiation anticipates an on-going relationship, such as employer-employee, between neighbours or separating spouses who have children. These strategies do not build trust and are likely to lead to anger, frustration and impasse in the negotiation. And they are not guaranteed to be effective; indeed there is lots of research to suggest that the use of distributive negotiation strategies produce, on the whole, less satisfactory agreements than those reached using more cooperative strategies.
In another article we will discuss how and when to use win-win, interest-based bargaining strategy.