University Of Zimbabwe

Graduate School of Management

NAME : ENIAS BIZA

REG NO : R013103H

PROGRAMME : MBA Part 1, 2nd Semester

COURSE : NEGOTIATING SKILLS ASSIGN 2

YEAR : 2010

DUE DATE : 21/11/ 2010

LECTURER : MR B W LOUW

QUESTION :

Define the term Tactics. Are tactics always easy to counter? If

not what are we to do about it. How do we deal with
unethical tactics?

1
Introduction
Tactics are the methods that you choose to use in order to achieve what you want in a
particular situation. The term “tactic” originated from the military to mean specific actions
employed to win a battle. It involves several ways to achieve a set objective. Hence, tactics
are devices used occasionally during negotiations usually to gain special advantage on behalf
of one’s party. Negotiation tactics are therefore a set of tools that we can draw on in any
negotiation situation. Only when we truly understand the tools in our tool box, and which tools
to draw upon to suit the negotiation situation we are in, can we become true negotiators. As
ROC Connect Limited (2007) put it, “When negotiating, aim as high as you feel necessary in
order to gain the best deal for yourself”.

Tactics are often deceptive and manipulative and are used to fulfil one party's goals and
objectives - often to the detriment of the other negotiation parties. This makes most tactics in
use today 'win-lose' by nature. Negotiation tactics are rarely thought out in advance. They are
ordinary pieces of human behaviour which in the past have worked and which are mostly
applied unconsciously. When someone uses tactics against you successfully you are
responsible for reinforcing their belief that their behaviour works and therefore you are in part
responsible for the tactics.

Some tactics are acceptable, while others are downright sleazy. Tactics are part of the
process, and one can use them and still maintain the negotiations on an honest level. In other
words, the use of tactics doesn’t necessarily mean tricking or manipulating people. Some
tactics are simply tools to expedite the negotiation process; others are used to take
advantage of the other person. The following negotiation tactics can be used and the methods
one can use to deflect them:

The Wince
The wince can be explained as any overt negative reaction to someone’s offer. For example,
you might act stunned or surprised when your negotiating counterpart names their terms. This
tactic tells your counterpart that you know your limits, which isn’t under-handed or dishonest.
And wincing at the right time can potentially save you thousands of dollars. Keep in mind that
when deals are negotiable, your counterpart will start high. In this case, you can counter with
the next tactic.

Silence
In the negotiation process, silence can be your strongest tool. If you don’t like what your
counterpart has said, or if you’ve made an offer and you’re waiting for a response, just sit
back and wait. Most people feel uncomfortable when conversation ceases, and they start
talking automatically to fill the void. Almost without fail, your counterpart will start whittling
away his or her position when you use this tactic.

2
So what if you find yourself negotiating with a person who understands the importance of
silence as well as you? Rather than wasting time in silence, restate your offer. Don’t make
suggestions; just repeat your terms. This manoeuvre forces the other person to respond, and
more often than not, they respond with a concession.

The Good Guy/Bad Guy Routine

This sleazy tactic is often used in movies, where two detectives are interrogating a person
who’s just been arrested. One detective seems unreasonable and inflexible, while the other
tries to make it look like he or she is on the suspect’s side. This tactic is designed to get you
to make concessions without the other side making any in return.

Limited Authority
This tactic is a variation on the good guy/bad guy routine, but instead of two people working
over you, the one person you’re dealing with tells you that he or she must approve any deals
with an unseen higher authority. Sometimes, this higher authority exists, but other times your
counterpart will create this figure to gain an edge in the negotiation process.So just because
your counterpart tells you, "It’s out of my hands," don’t automatically assume the person is
being honest. In this type of situation, two options exist: one, ask to deal directly with this so-
called higher authority; or two, test the limits of your counterpart. You may find that although
the other person has used this tactic to force you into backing down, if you keep at him or her,
you may get what you want.

The Red Herring

This technique comes from fox hunting competitions, where one team drags a dead fish
across the fox’s path to distract the other team’s dogs. At the bargaining table, a red herring
means one side brings up a minor point to distract the other side from the main issue.
Effective and ethical negotiators generally agree that this tactic is the sleaziest of them all.

When your negotiation process is bogged down with a minor problem, and your counterpart
insists on settling it before they’ll even talk about more important issues, then you are
probably dealing with a red herring. In this case, use extreme caution, and suggest setting the
issue aside temporarily to work out other details.

The Trial Balloon

Trial balloons are questions designed to assess your negotiating counterpart’s position
without giving any clues about your plans. For example, you may ask your counterpart,
"Would you consider trying our services on a temporary basis?" Essentially, these types of
questions put the ball in your counterpart’s court, and the nice part about them is they aren’t
really offers. They allow you to gain information without making a commitment. When you’re

3
on the receiving end of a trial balloon question, you may feel compelled to answer it
thoroughly. To maintain your edge, resist this temptation and counter with another question.

Low-Balling
Low-balling is the opposite of the trial balloon. Instead of tempting you to make the first offer,
your counterpart will open the process with a fantastic offer. Then after you agree, they start
hitting you with additional necessities. For example, say you see an ad for a product priced
lower than other stores. But then after you agree to buy, the sales representative uncovers
the hidden costs, such as shipping or installation. In the end you probably pay more than you
would have at another store listing a higher price on the product. To avoid falling victim to this
tactic, ask your counterpart about additional costs before agreeing to any deal.

The Bait-and-Switch
Similar to low-balling, the bait-and-switch tactic should be avoided. Your counterpart may try
to attract your interests with one great offer, but then hook you with another mediocre one.
This tactic will almost always burn you, unless you can recognize it. If your counterpart were
really able to offer a genuinely good deal, they wouldn’t have to resort to bait-and-switch.

Outrageous Behaviour
Outrageous behaviour can be categorized as any form of socially unacceptable conduct
intended to force the other side to make a move, such as throwing a fit of anger or bursting
into tears. As most people feel uncomfortable in these situations, they may reduce their
negotiating terms just to avoid them. However, the most effective response to outrageous
behaviour is none at all. Just wait for the fit to die down before reacting, because emotional
negotiation can result in disaster.

The Written Word

When terms of a deal are written out, they often seem non-negotiable. For example, when
was the last time you negotiated a lease, or a loan, or even a service contract that was typed
up in advance in an official-looking document? You probably assumed these deals were non-
negotiable, and for some reason most people make the same mistake of accepting terms that
appear in writing.

The best defence against this tactic is simply to question everything, whether it appears in
writing or not. You’ll inevitably run into some standard, non-negotiable documents, but it never
hurts to ask questions. You may be surprised how many contracts actually are negotiable
when challenged.

People have used these negotiation tactics for years, but that doesn’t mean they are always
fair. So before you rush into your next negotiation situation, make yourself aware of these

4
tactics and how they affect the process. When you learn the uses and defences of these
negotiation techniques, you can reach more mutually beneficial agreements and win more
sales on better terms.

DEALING WITH UNETHICAL PRACTICES

What can you do if you detect unethical or illegal behaviour in a negotiation? First, we identify
the tactic A tactic perceived is a tactic which has lost most of its power to influence. Second,
counter by using the same tactic back or using another to regain equality of the power
balance. Try the following sequence of responses, escalating only as far as needed to put the
brakes on the other player.
1. Ignore It. Sometimes if you simply ignore unethical or illegal behaviour, it will
subside. If not:
2. Identify It. Say what they’re doing and why you think it was wrong. Don’t make
it sound like a personal attack – try to be objective. Often people will stop doing
something wrong when it is brought in to view. If not:
3. Warn Them. Say they are endangering the negotiation by continuing their
improper behaviour and that you’ll walk out of the negotiation if it continues. If
that doesn’t do it:
4. Set Ground Rules. Take time out to talk about how the negotiation is
progressing, and try to negotiate new ground rules. If you don’t get significant
concessions, though, you should either walk away or, if you feel you can’t avoid
this negotiation:
5. Tell Them the Consequences. Tell them how you will respond if they repeat the
improper behaviour. Be clear in your own mind on how you will respond, so that
this threat is realistic and actionable. In general, threats should be about
breaking off the negotiation, about using some kind of hardball tactic, or about
appealing to a third party (like a boss) who has some power over the person you
are threatening.
6. Act. If you decide to retaliate, you might try a very strong scolding, anger, or even
a competitive or unethical tactic of your own. Sometimes a tit – for – tat approach
brings the other party into line – but not always, so this is a high-risk approach.
Besides, it often leads you to use unethical tactics that you don’t like, so in a sense
you lose even if you win.

One should also consider two other actions that are easier to control: withdrawing from the
negotiation, and bringing in a third party with authority to stop the offending behaviour. The
other weapons to watch out for are the use of the opposite sex in a negotiation and the offer
of a bribe which might be in the open or hidden. To counter that, sticking to business
principles would save a fortune.

5
CONCLUSION
Negotiation is a soft skill. While you can learn how to attach a widget to a widget by watching
a video, and while flight simulation software is extremely popular, in each of those cases
there's normally only one right answer. Negotiation is not like that; one needs to have the
capacity to roll with punches, to modify strategy or tactics when a new factor crops up. The
greater your ability to negotiate the more profit you will make and the less stress you will
place yourself under. "You can't count on negotiating everything all at once. Getting what you
want may take more time than you think." (Steven P. Cohen).

REFERENCES
1. Bett, J. M. 2001. Negotiating Globally, Jossey-Bass, San Franscisco.
Cassandra, D. I. V. A. 2007. A-Z Dictionary of Negotiation Tips, How to Negotiate
www.how-tonegotiate.com/archives/2007/07/in_negotiations_personality

2. Dr Bent, M. 2007. Body Language News, Blog Archive. WWW-Based.

3. El-Kadi, O. 2007. Business Negotiation, In “10 Minutes” Your will Learn “Negotiation
Strategy” http://ezineArticles.com/?expert=OsamaEL-KADI.

4. Kersten, G.E. and Noronha, S.J. 1999. Design, implementation, and Use, Decision
support Systems, www-based Negotiation Support

5. Max Felix & Associates, 2005. Negotiation Tactics,

http://www.maxfelix.com/genbiz.htm

6. Potgieter, J. 2007. Collaborative Negotiation Strategy, Negotiation Academy,

www.negotiationtraining.com.au/articles/ -

7. ROK Connect Limited. 2007. Negotiation Skills,

www.bizhelp24.com/personal_development/negotiation_skills.shtml - 57k

8. Stolar, V. 2004. Strategic Negotiation for the New Millennium, Holiday Villa, Subang
Jaya.

9. Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Translated by translated by Yuan Shibing 1987.

10. Tressler, D. M. August 2007. Negotiation in the New Strategic Environment: Lessons
from Iraq. www.strategicStudiesInstitute.army.mil/

11. Ury W, 1991. Getting past No, Negotiating with difficult people, Business Books
limited