Inevitably in negotiation, we encounter counterparts who view “white lies” and other ethically questionable tactics as acceptable tools of competitive bargaining. Complicating matters further, many dubious persuasion tactics fall squarely within the bounds of the law, making them difficult to challenge or prevent outright. Recognizing these realities is essential for negotiators who want to protect their interests, maintain ethical standards, and steer talks toward fair and constructive outcomes.
A classic example comes from 1989, when Sony Corporation was negotiating its $5 billion purchase of Columbia Pictures. As part of the deal, Sony entered separate talks with film producers Jon Peters and Peter Guber about running its new film division—a side arrangement reportedly worth $200 million. Peters and Guber wanted the job badly, but they faced a significant obstacle: both were under contract with Warner Brothers and needed time to negotiate their release.
Rather than focusing exclusively on this legitimate concern, the producers introduced two additional issues they didn’t actually care about. An all-night negotiation ensued, during which all three issues were debated at length. By morning, Peters and Guber “conceded” on the two phony issues and asked Sony to concede on timing. Sony took the bait, granting them a month to negotiate with Warner.
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.
In his book Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People, G. Richard Shell analyzes this episode—drawn from Nancy Griffin and Kim Masters’s book Hit & Run: How Jon Peters and Peter Guber Took Sony for a Ride in Hollywood—as a vivid illustration of the unethical negotiation tactics people sometimes use to get what they want. Below are several tactics from Shell’s “rogues’ gallery,” along with strategies for neutralizing them.
- The Red Herring
- Authority Ploys
- The Good Guy/Bad Guy Routine
Like the producers in the opening story, negotiators sometimes introduce extra issues they don’t truly value. After pressing hard on all fronts, they eventually retreat on the bogus issues and then ask for concessions on the one or two issues that actually matter to them. This tactic often succeeds because it makes the negotiator appear flexible and cooperative.
If a counterpart insists that all issues are equally important, don’t accept the claim at face value. One effective way to uncover their real priorities is to present multiple, equivalent, simultaneous offers, a technique recommended by Northwestern University professor Victoria Husted Medvec and Columbia Business School professor Adam D. Galinsky.
For example, if a prospective client claims that price, delivery time, and contract length matter equally, offer three different packages that vary across those dimensions but that you value equally. If the client resists choosing or narrowing the options, explain that you’re open to further discussion but want to focus negotiations productively. Their reactions—and eventual preferences—can reveal which issues truly drive the deal.
In car dealerships, salespeople sometimes claim they lack authority to finalize a deal. When they disappear briefly and return with their manager’s “approval,” you may feel relieved—and even grateful—enough to accept mediocre terms.
The implied endorsement of a higher authority can make an unremarkable deal seem more appealing, a psychological effect that skilled negotiators sometimes exploit. To protect yourself, suggest before negotiations begin that both sides secure a clear mandate from anyone who may need to approve the agreement.
Conversely, negotiators may claim authority they do not actually possess. Lawyers, agents, and brokers sometimes assert—falsely—that they cannot accept an offer because it doesn’t meet a client’s threshold. When possible, Shell advises, try to negotiate directly with the principal. Because intermediaries’ incentives may diverge from those of their clients, going to the source can clarify priorities and speed agreement.
Imagine sitting down with two sales associates, Tim and Mindy. Tim greets you warmly and emphasizes his desire to meet your goals. Mindy follows with an outrageous demand. As negotiations stall, Tim urges Mindy to soften her stance. Suddenly, Tim feels like an ally—and you find yourself offering concessions you never intended to make.
This is the classic “good guy/bad guy” routine. According to Shell, it exploits our natural tendency to trust people who appear agreeable and aligned with our interests, especially when contrasted with a more abrasive counterpart.
Once you recognize the pattern, addressing it directly can be effective. Shell suggests naming the dynamic aloud: “It seems like Tim’s the good guy and Mindy’s the bad guy here. Could we try working together more collaboratively?” That said, proceed carefully. If the two negotiators are not coordinating but simply expressing genuine differences in personality or perspective, your observation could offend them. As with many negotiation moves, judgment and timing matter.
What other unethical negotiation tactics have you learned to defuse?
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.
No Responses to “Unethical Negotiation Tactics: Are You Prepared for Dirty Tricks?”