Negotiation preparation often involves looking outward: at our options, our counterparts’ reputation, the format of our meetings, and so much more. But as two new studies show, it can be just as important to look inward—specifically at the mindset we bring to our negotiations.
Reducing the Anchoring Effect
Due to the anchoring effect, negotiators are often advised to make the first offer. The party who puts the first offer on the table drops an “anchor” that can strongly influence the other party’s counteroffer, the offers that follow, and any final agreement they reach. The anchoring effect reflects research by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman showing that even random numbers can have an outsized effect on people’s judgments and decisions.
But it’s not always wise or even possible to make the first offer, as when you have limited knowledge of the bargaining zone or when convention dictates that the other party will make the first offer. In job negotiations, for example, the job candidate typically waits for an offer and then tries to bargain to improve it.
When receiving the first offer, how can you avoid the anchoring effect? In a 2024 article, researchers Krishna Savani and Monica Wadhwa found in a series of experiments that when negotiators adopted a “choice mindset,” they were better able to resist a counterpart’s anchor and negotiate better outcomes for themselves. “When a choice mindset is activated, people believe that they themselves and others have multiple options available,” the authors write.
In one experiment, for example, participants imagined they were in the market for a used car and were shown listings for six cars offered by a dealer, which included photographs, information about the car, and a quoted price. They were told there was likely room to negotiate and asked how much they would offer for each car. Participants in a choice-mindset condition were also told, “You can choose to offer any amount that you want for this car. It’s your choice!” Those in the control condition did not get this additional guidance. The participants who were induced with a choice mindset made more ambitious counteroffers and reached better deals than those in the control condition—that is, they were less prone to being anchored by the quoted price.
Simply reminding yourself that you have choices before or upon receiving a first offer from a counterpart may reduce the anchoring effect, the results suggest. A choice mindset might also help to defuse other common cognitive biases in negotiation that narrow our thinking, such as the status quo bias (the tendency to resist change, even when a better opportunity comes along) and the availability heuristic (the tendency to favor options that are foremost in our minds).
Claim your FREE copy: Negotiation Skills
Build powerful negotiation skills and become a better dealmaker and leader. Download our FREE special report, Negotiation Skills: Negotiation Strategies and Negotiation Techniques to Help You Become a Better Negotiator, from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
Does Meditation Help or Hurt?
For negotiators, another helpful shift in mindset might come from the practice of meditation. In general, meditation has been found to reduce stress and anxiety, improve attention span, and decrease blood pressure, among other benefits. This might lead to the conclusion that meditation might have positive effects on negotiation performance. Researchers are beginning to study whether this is the case.
Because meditation enhances our awareness of ourselves and our surroundings, it might help us more effectively regulate our emotions and behaviors in negotiation, theorized researcher María C. Pérez-Yus and her colleagues in a 2020 article. The researchers recruited 94 participants in Spain, 50 of whom had practiced meditation daily for six months and 44 of whom did not meditate. Participants were assessed on several dimensions, including their negotiation effectiveness, demographics (age, gender, etc.), emotional intelligence, personality traits, and mindfulness. The meditators were found to be more effective negotiators overall, and they also tended to adopt a more collaborative negotiating style. The meditators also scored higher in emotional intelligence, mindfulness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness, and lower on neuroticism.
Other research has found a positive association between meditation and negotiation behaviors in the United Kingdom and Singapore. Interestingly, however, 10 studies conducted in the United States, led by Andrew C. Hafenbrack, found that undergraduate students who meditated just before negotiating claimed slightly less value for themselves than those who had not meditated. In addition, meditators and nonmeditators created similar amounts of value.
Hafenbrack and colleagues conclude that “there are differences in the effect of mindfulness on negotiation across national cultures.” Why? They offer several suggestions, yet to be tested. For example, it could be that mindfulness blunts negotiators’ anger, which could be a benefit in less confrontational cultures (including Singapore and the United Kingdom) but a deficit in cultures where anger expressions are more accepted and viewed as useful information in negotiation (such as the United States).
It could also be that those who have a long-term meditation practice benefit more than those who simply briefly meditate—perhaps for the first time—before engaging in a negotiation simulation exercise. The bottom line? Don’t avoid mixing meditation and negotiation. The former has many proven benefits, and any negative impact it might have on your negotiation performance is likely to be small and culturally variable.
What shifts in mindset have you found to be helpful in reducing the anchoring effect and negotiating more effectively?
Claim your FREE copy: Negotiation Skills
Build powerful negotiation skills and become a better dealmaker and leader. Download our FREE special report, Negotiation Skills: Negotiation Strategies and Negotiation Techniques to Help You Become a Better Negotiator, from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
