What type of bargainer are you? Many negotiation strategies are described as “one size fits all,” but our personalities and life experiences inevitably shape how we carry out—and react to—those strategies. Familiarity with well-known models of conflict styles and bargaining styles can help us better understand our own tendencies, anticipate others’ behavior, and negotiate more effectively.
Two of the most widely used frameworks come from the fields of conflict management and negotiation: the Thomas-Kilmann model of conflict styles and G. Richard Shell’s model of bargaining styles.
Conflict Styles: The Thomas-Kilmann Model
The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument identifies five common approaches people use to manage conflict. Each style has strengths and weaknesses, and no single style is universally “right.”
1. Competing. People with a competing conflict style view interpersonal conflict resolution as win-lose games. Rather than recognizing the value of ensuring that each party walks away satisfied, disputants focus narrowly on claiming as much as they can for themselves.
2. Avoiding. Those with an avoiding conflict style prefer to sidestep conflict altogether because it feels uncomfortable or risky. While avoidance can be useful in the short term, unresolved issues often resurface—and sometimes with greater intensity.
3. Accommodating. Accommodators put others’ needs and demands first. This approach can make them appear agreeable and cooperative, but consistently neglecting their own interests can lead to frustration or resentment over time.
4. Compromising. Compromisers often try to split the difference or meet halfway between opposing positions. Although compromise can move discussions forward, it may fail to address underlying interests, making agreements fragile or short-lived.
5. Collaborating. Collaborators aim to understand the deeper interests behind each side’s positions and to express their own needs openly. By exploring tradeoffs across issues, they seek solutions that give each party more of what they value.
Although collaborative negotiation style can be highly effective at managing conflict and fostering productive long-term relationships, different conflict-management styles can be effectively applied to different phases and types of conflict in management. In addition, we may adopt different conflict styles depending on the situation.
Claim your FREE copy: The New Conflict Management
In our FREE special report from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School - The New Conflict Management: Effective Conflict Resolution Strategies to Avoid Litigation – renowned negotiation experts uncover unconventional approaches to conflict management that can turn adversaries into partners.
Negotiating Styles: G. Richard Shell’s Model
In Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People, Wharton professor G. Richard Shell introduces a Bargaining Styles Assessment Tool, also available online. Like the Thomas-Kilmann model, Shell’s framework maps negotiators into five styles: competing, avoiding, accommodating, compromising, and collaborating.
Shell emphasizes that most people do not rely on a single style. Instead, they show “strong or weak preferences for several strategies,” and the interaction of those preferences shapes how they behave at the bargaining table in any given situation.
Crucially, Shell argues that there is no ideal negotiating style. Each comes with advantages and liabilities. For example, accommodators often excel at relationship building and are attuned to emotional cues—valuable skills in many negotiations. At the same time, Shell warns, they may place “more weight on the relationship aspect of the negotiations than the situation may warrant,” leaving themselves vulnerable to more competitive counterparts.
Misreading Your Counterpart’s Style
One of Shell’s most intriguing observations is that negotiators tend to assume others share their own style. When a competitive negotiator encounters a cooperative one, each may misinterpret the other’s behavior—sometimes with damaging consequences.
A cooperative negotiator who shares information freely may be viewed by a competitive counterpart as naïve or deceptive. The competitive negotiator may exploit the openness, while the cooperative negotiator, feeling betrayed, reacts with anger or withdrawal. The result is confusion, mistrust, and missed opportunities.
To avoid this dynamic, Shell advises negotiators to test the waters early. By negotiating smaller issues at the outset, you can observe how your counterpart behaves:
- Do they reciprocate concessions?
- Do they share information or withhold it?
- Do they focus on joint gains or individual advantage?
Rather than trying to convert someone to your preferred style, Shell suggests accepting them as they are and adjusting your approach accordingly. “Don’t waste time trying to convert the person,” he writes. Focus instead on achieving your goals.
Becoming a More Adaptable Negotiator
According to Shell, our natural negotiating style tends to remain fairly stable over time. But that doesn’t mean we’re stuck with it. Regardless of our default conflict or bargaining style, we can improve our effectiveness by cultivating a few core habits:
- Thorough preparation before entering negotiations
- High expectations about what can be achieved
- Patient listening to uncover critical information
- Personal integrity, which helps build a strong reputation over time
These habits cut across styles and situations, helping negotiators become more flexible and resilient in the face of conflict.
What value have you gained from diagnosing your own—and others’—conflict and bargaining styles?
Claim your FREE copy: The New Conflict Management
In our FREE special report from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School - The New Conflict Management: Effective Conflict Resolution Strategies to Avoid Litigation – renowned negotiation experts uncover unconventional approaches to conflict management that can turn adversaries into partners.
