Have you ever found yourself negotiating with a difficult personality—or with someone who seemed entirely ruthless and lacking in empathy? From time to time, we may all end up in the deeply unsettling position of negotiating with someone who appears to have little concern for our interests or outcomes.
People who are antisocial, lack empathy, and habitually engage in impulsive, manipulative, and even cruel behavior are believed to make up roughly 1% of the general population, according to longstanding psychological research. Psychologists often refer to such individuals as psychopaths. We largely avoid that term here, however, because popular culture has come to associate psychopathy almost exclusively with violent criminals. In reality, the vast majority of people who score high on psychopathy are not violent and do not engage in criminal behavior.
Yet some experts have argued that individuals with such antisocial personalities may be overrepresented in the business world, particularly in environments that reward dominance, charisma, and risk-taking.
“Without the inhibiting effect of a conscience,” writes Middlesex University Business School professor Clive Roland Boddy in Management Decision, such individuals can “ruthlessly charm, lie, cajole and manipulate their way up an organizational hierarchy in pursuit of their main aims of power, wealth and status and at the expense of anyone who gets in their way.” People with these traits are often driven by a desire for control, dominance, and prestige—qualities that many organizations, intentionally or not, tend to reward, notes University of California, Davis professor Robert Emmons.
Claim your FREE copy: Dealing with Difficult People
Discover how to collaborate, negotiate, and bargain with even the most combative opponents with, Dealing with Difficult People, a FREE report from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
Until relatively recently, little was known about how people with these personality traits—or with the other two so-called dark personalities, Machiavellianism and narcissism—behave at the negotiating table. (Individuals scoring high on Machiavellianism tend to be ruthlessly focused on personal gain, while those scoring high on narcissism are self-absorbed and see themselves as superior to others.)
However, a series of studies published in Personality and Individual Differences has offered preliminary insights into how individuals scoring high on what psychologists call the dark triad—psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism—approach negotiation. The findings provide useful defensive guidance for anyone negotiating with difficult personalities.
When Negotiating with Difficult Personalities, a Selfish Orientation Has Advantages and Drawbacks
People with ruthless, antisocial personalities may outperform others in certain types of negotiations—but they are disadvantaged in others. That was the conclusion of a 2015 study by Leanne ten Brinke of the University of California, Berkeley, and her University of British Columbia colleagues Pamela J. Black, Stephen Porter, and Dana R. Carney.
The researchers paired undergraduate business students and asked them to engage in a negotiation simulation involving the sale of a family business—one in which participants could both claim value and create value. Two months later, as part of a class assignment on personality, participants completed validated surveys measuring dark-triad traits.
Those who scored high on psychopathy (but not on Machiavellianism or narcissism) claimed more value than other negotiators. At the same time, they were significantly less effective at creating value. The effects largely canceled each other out: overall performance by negotiators with psychopathic traits was similar to that of others. (Pairs in which both negotiators scored high on psychopathy achieved slightly worse joint outcomes, though the difference was not statistically significant.)
These findings suggest that individuals with ruthless, antisocial personalities behave at the bargaining table much as we might expect: competitively and self-interestedly. While this orientation may not harm them in one-shot negotiations, it can become a serious liability over time if it prevents the development of trust and reciprocity.
When negotiating with competitive counterparts who appear unconcerned about your outcomes, it may be effective to frame cooperation in terms of what they personally stand to gain, rather than appealing to fairness or mutual benefit.
An Online Advantage When Negotiating with Difficult Personalities
In another study, University of British Columbia researchers Lisa Crossley, Michael Woodworth, Pamela J. Black, and Robert Hare examined whether individuals scoring high on psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism performed better when negotiating face to face or online.
After assessing participants’ personalities, the researchers paired them for a hypothetical negotiation over concert tickets. The negotiation was purely competitive, with no opportunity for value creation, and took place either in person or via computer-based chat.
The results were striking. Participants scoring high on dark-triad traits performed significantly better in face-to-face negotiations than they did online. When negotiating via computer, they actually fared worse than other negotiators.
One explanation lies in the absence of rich interpersonal cues online. Face-to-face negotiations provide tone of voice, facial expressions, gestures, and eye contact—tools that individuals high in dark-triad traits may rely on to charm, intimidate, or manipulate their counterparts.
If you strongly suspect that a counterpart exhibits one of these traits, negotiating online—particularly in competitive, one-time bargaining situations—may reduce your vulnerability to manipulation or intimidation.
A Final Caution Before Playing Armchair Psychologist
Negotiators often make the mistake of assuming that their counterparts are irrational or malicious. More often than not, behavior that appears unreasonable stems from hidden constraints, competing pressures, or stressors.
Before labeling a counterpart as “difficult” or “dark,” give them the benefit of the doubt. Asking thoughtful questions may reveal unseen pressures that explain their behavior—and open the door to more productive dialogue.
The Narcissistic Negotiator
Narcissism, psychologists tell us, is on the rise. But does society’s growing self-focus change how we negotiate?
In a 2015 study, University of Richmond professor Dejun Tony Kong paired undergraduates for a negotiation simulation. Afterward, participants completed a personality assessment. Those scoring high on narcissism rated their negotiating partners as significantly less competent than did participants scoring lower on narcissism.
Despite their dismissive attitudes, narcissistic negotiators did not achieve better outcomes. In fact, they trusted their counterparts less and viewed them as less benevolent.
Ironically, their counterparts tended to see the narcissistic negotiators as more benevolent and trustworthy than others.
Driven by a constant need to protect and enhance their self-image, narcissists appear prone to distorted self-assessments and excessive suspicion—tendencies that may quietly undermine their negotiating effectiveness, whether they recognize it or not.
Have you negotiated with difficult people? What was the outcome?
Adapted from the article “Negotiating with the Most Difficult People of All” in the June 2016 issue of Negotiation Briefings, the Program on Negotiation’s monthly newsletter of advice for professional negotiators.
Claim your FREE copy: Dealing with Difficult People
Discover how to collaborate, negotiate, and bargain with even the most combative opponents with, Dealing with Difficult People, a FREE report from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
