Deception in Negotiations
Negotiation is not something one can expect to master if they
have chosen a career in the military.
Most requests really are not requests at all, but they often sound
exactly like one. There are significant
differences. For example, consider the
statement ‘please sweep and mop the floor’.
As a civilian, the response could be no, I was not hired to clean floors,
I am busy; I’ll take care of it later, I do not have time for that, find
someone else, or sure I will get right to it.
Then the requestor and the requestee can begin negotiating from that
point if necessary. The requestee may
even win the negotiation. In the
military, a request is only a request if the requestee immediately gets up and
begins doing what was requested, in this case…sweeping. Any other response will most likely generate
a ‘shut up and color’ discussion. These
discussions are one sided, louder than normal conversations, and are where the
original statement is altered to more clearly represent the intended message. By simply dropping ‘please’ from the beginning
and adding ‘now’ to the end of the statement, the request becomes an order and
the expected response is yes Ma’am, which is also the intelligent
response. Any other response will not
generate another round of peaceful negotiation or compromise. This summarizes negotiation in the military.
Negotiation has different meanings depending on
perspective. From a business frame
negotiation is defined as a “bargaining (give and take) process between two or
more parties (each with its own aims, needs, and viewpoints) seeking to
discover a common ground and reach an agreement to settle a matter of mutual
concern or resolve a conflict” (BusinessDictionary.com, 2017). Everyone negotiates whether they realize it
at the time or not. In the home,
toddlers negotiate when they share toys, adolescents negotiate for more
allowance, teens negotiate to get a cell phone or a car, and adults are
normally the second party in a negotiation or the mediator to negotiations gone
bad. The objective of negotiation is to
reach an agreement (often a compromise) allowing both parties to move forward
with their day. If negotiation does not
produce an agreement, hostility can erupt from the frustration. This could force an intervention to help put
the negotiation back on track. The issue
is important to each side or negotiation would not be necessary from the start. Therefore, the problem must be resolved. This simplified example is true for any
negotiation. However, the stakes are
much higher in business negotiations and could be the difference in an entire
company’s success or failure.
With stakes so high, negotiators employ differing strategies
to get the advantage in a negotiation. Sadly,
one of the strategies is deception.
Deception or lying is common in negotiations. In fact, lying is so common that both parties
are cautioned to expect the other to lie.
Lies are separated into different categories and severity levels. Lies of omission occur when relevant
information is withheld. Lies of
commission occur when someone actively misrepresents information. Lies of commission are judged more seriously. Lies are further categorized by subject,
object, and primary motivation (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001).
Lying is my biggest pet peeve.
I am an honest person. I am not a
saint, but I will not intentionally deceive anyone for personal gain. I trust people up front and expect that they
will be honest with me. This ideal has
not always served me well. I have been
lied too and taken advantage of. I have
made major decisions based on incorrect and incomplete information which in
turn caused me major problems. I have
unknowingly passed incorrect and incomplete information to my boss. And the cycle continues. It is organizational cancer. If I am lied to, shame on the liar. They will not get the opportunity to do it
again. I have no tolerance for it. The business community should not tolerate it
either, much less accept lying as a norm for negotiations.
Negotiation is an important skill. I think it sad and telling that instead of
adding to or improving negotiating skill, this course is forced to focus on
deception in negotiations and how to guard against it. Why lie?
Using a decision-making tool like cost vs benefit analysis to tell you
that lying is the optimal choice does not make it the right thing to do. If it does, there is a much bigger problem in
the business mindset. Lessons learned
from the Enron debacle should clearly illustrate the effects of deception on an
organization. Okay, enough about that.
Hoch states that “deception of some kind is an inherent part
of human interaction” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 189). Negotiators chose to lie if the benefit of
lying is greater than the cost if caught, if the cost in dollars and reputation
is acceptable to risk getting caught, and if they decide they can live with the
guilt afterwards (Hoch, et al., 2001). I
do not believe it is possible to find a right-enough reason to do the wrong
thing. I believe the decision to lie in
negotiations comes from one place, greed.
I also believe there is no good reason to lie and, if caught, the
repercussions should be harsh.
Most of us overestimate our ability to detect a lie and we do
not want to think that deception would be used on us in negotiations that
provide information used to make important decisions” (Hoch et al., 2001, p.
189). I know and understand the
techniques used to determine deception, but unless a red flag went up I probably
would not become alerted to deception. Additionally,
negotiators that will lie are not likely to blatantly commit a lie of
commission and risk fraud charges (Hoch, et al., 2001). Lies of omission are not as clear-cut to me. Some of the examples for lies of omission
were in a grey area between lie and strategy for me. Allowing someone to draw their own
conclusions does not necessarily constitute a lie. Not revealing information that you are not
compelled to provide can be a good strategy.
However, when and if the information is provided, it has to be true and
accurate. Bluffing is strategy as
well. So at the risk of sounding
hypocritical, I can see how lies of omission could be difficult to
categorize.
I have been involved in many negotiations through the
years. I use to own and operate rental properties. I negotiated the purchase of each property,
built a business with them, and negotiated the sale of the business. I know how difficult negotiation and some
people can be. No two are the same. Buying and selling rental property could very
well lead the pack in lies of omission.
I always hired my own inspector instead of simply relying on the person
that does ‘all of their inspections, he’s the best’. Out of twenty or so purchases, there was only
one where the inspection reports contained serious conflicting information, it
saved me $3,000 and made me another $3,000.
I still bought the house. The
seller knew about a water leak under the slab.
They cleaned it up before my appointment. I did not see it. When I decided to make an offer, I sent my
inspector to the property. He, of
course, did not miss it. It really
infuriated me that they would intentionally hide an existing condition. The fact that they cleaned it up told me
their intent. I took pictures when I looked
at the house as did my inspector…roughly three hours after I took mine. When the foundation was fully saturated, the
water flowed into the garage from a crack in the foundation. They normally kept the water turned off, but
turned it on just before my appointment.
When I made the offer, it was contingent on the seller paying for and
having repairs completed to correct water leak(s) under the slab. I also reduced my offer by $3,000 for
existing water leak damages. The seller
accepted my offer without further negotiation.
If they had told me about the leak up front, I would have offered to
have my guy do the repairs and split the cost.
I never saw the seller again and quit doing business with the agency
that listed the house. The seller did
not tell me what the bottom line price was and I did not consider that a lie of
omission. They most likely overstated
their investment in repairs and maintenance, which, if true, would be a lie of
commission. I did not care about this
either; the intent was to increase the perceived value of their property, not
to harm me...strategy. The work had been
done, whether or not they paid to have it done or did it themselves and
estimated their own rate did not matter.
More recently, I was looking for an old go-cart I could
restore and give to my grandsons for Christmas. I was not in a hurry because they are not big
enough to drive it by themselves yet. I
saw the cart as I drove by a yard sale.
From the street, it did not look too bad, so I stopped. On closer inspection, it was not in the shape
I originally thought. It had been
recently and poorly spray painted red.
It had an engine, but it did not look good. I was going to replace it anyway, so I
actually hoped it would not start. Looking closer four wheels and four tires none
of them matched. The two front wheels
were different sizes. One was four
inches and the other was six inches, both rested on the ground perfectly…the
frame was twisted and the axel that held on the left front tire was bent. It was lightly rusted, well, everywhere. The seat had rotted away long ago and the
steering wheel was warped and one of the three center spokes was broken. The cart had been in a hard crash at some
point. However, the frame was complete
with a roll cage that looked like new. The
frame tubing was in good condition. It
was not crushed wrinkled or crimped anywhere.
And, the cart was the right size and a two seater. It was a perfect mess.
The guy came up and told me to take it for a spin, but I
doubted it would. After spraying ether
in the carburetor, he pulled the rope and the engine started. It did not sound good at all and he could not
keep it running, but it started. The carburetor
was bad, probably from old gas. It did
not matter why. I commented, that’s not
good. He did not know what happened, he said
he rode it a couple hours earlier.
I asked him what he wanted for the cart. He said $150, and I replied I imagine you
do. I said the engine needs work before
it will move the cart. Then, it will
only go in circles because of the front wheels and by the way how did the frame
get so warped? I told him the cart probably
would not bring $50. He began to explain
the warping and the bent axel. I told
him it had been wrecked hard at least twice, once from a jump and once on the left
side and the left tire and wheel took a direct hit. I also assured him adjusting the tie rods
would not fix the problem. He finally
admitted that he had picked up the cart from someone’s front yard. It was waiting to be hauled off for
junk. He painted it red and set it out
to sell. I offered him $75 because the
roll cage was in good shape and the frame was complete. He accepted the offer. I gave him four $20 bills. He could not make change, so I told him we’re
even if you can get it loaded into my truck which he did.
When I told him the cart would not bring $50 the truth was it
was probably worth the$150 he wanted,
but he did not know why it was which cost him any leverage he had. He presented it as a functional cart. It was far from functional. From that view point, it would not bring
$50. If he had checked, the roll cage
alone cost $135 to replace. A used one
in this condition would cost $100, if you could find one.
Every time the guy opened his mouth, what came out was a
lie. He lied all the way up until he
admitted getting it from a trash pile for free.
I probably could have taken it for $50, but it was worth more. The $80 I paid was a fair price for me and a
great deal for him.
Going into a negotiation is not a play-date. Not knowing what you have, can cost you
dearly. You have to be prepared to
defend your position, take the offensive when you can, and make your point
better than the other side. But you do
not have to lie, especially knowing the lie will hurt (add cost, work, or time)
the other guy. I still argue that you
can employ strategy without lying. Lies
of omission in my mind are not always a lie, although that line gets very thin
sometimes. The intent of the lie is telling. During negotiations there are things you can
do to minimize the risk of being deceived.
The first is to be honest in your strategy starting when you
shake hands and introduce yourself. Showing
yourself as trustworthy in words and actions early in negotiation will go a
long way towards establishing a deception-free negotiation (Hoch, et al., 2001).
Another way to guard against deception is to ask direct
questions. Preparation is necessary
here. The deeper your understanding of
both sides during the negotiation, the quicker you will notice when something
is off course. This will help you to ask
direct and pertinent questions. Try to
keep questions direct but not accusatory.
When asked a direct question the other side is much less likely to lie
(Hoch, et al., 2001). Direct questioning
is active communication and allows you to be more in tune with the nonverbal
cues of your counterpart.
Nonverbal cues cannot be controlled and still appear
natural. When verbal and nonverbal cues
are out of alignment, it could be an indication of deception. However jumping to a conclusion in this area
may not be the best strategy. Instead,
watch them closely while they answer one of your direct questions. Do they change demeanor, do they begin to
sweat, does their skin flush, do they stop or slow their gestures? An affirmative answer is an indication of discomfort
or uneasiness with the topic. Ask more
direct questions on the topic or ask for clarification on a previous
answer. Further direct questioning on
the topic may help sort out mismatched verbal, visual, and nonverbal messages.
It is always important and polite to listen carefully in
conversation, but negotiation is not normal conversation, it is much more
focused and intense. Listen for the
whole message. The text states listen
carefully to what is and is not said (Hoch, et al., 2001). The whole message is more yet. Listen for changes in tonal quality,
inflection, emphasis, speed, and loudness. Can you hear frustration, anger, or
aggravation? Listening to the whole
message means that you are listening for the verbal or vocal cues and watching
the visual or nonverbal cues while your counterpart is answering your direct
questions. They should all align and
appear natural. But do not forget to
listen to how they actually answer your question. It will feel uncomfortable in the beginning, but
the more you practice the easier it becomes.
Taking an aggressive position in a negotiation may not be the
best one, but it is a strategy. If it is
a strategy and the intent was not to actually be aggressive but to make the
counterpart think there may be trouble.
The real intent was to intimidate.
Is that a lie of omission? I am a
pretty honest guy and I have to say I did not have a problem lies of
omission. I honestly felt that they play
a significant role in strategy. Strategy
is not deceptive, but asks you to predict the next move and counter it. To contradict myself, one of my examples
included an omission that I had a big problem with. The intent of the omission or primary
motivation in my example was malicious. Information
was purposely omitted to hide and transfer a known burden for the buyer (me) to
bear and resolve. Now that I no longer
know what a lie is: I will not
intentionally or knowingly commit a lie of commission. I will not commit a lie of omission for the
purpose of causing damage to the other side.
Negotiation is a process between two or more parties seeking to discover
a common ground and reach an agreement to settle a matter of mutual concern or
resolve a conflict” (BusinessDictionary.com, 2017).
References:
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making
decisions. (1st edition.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
negotiation.
BusinessDictionary.com (2017). Retrieved February 06, 2017, from
BusinessDictionary.com website: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/negotiation.htmlBu
No comments:
Post a Comment