A632.4.4.RB - Deception in Negotiations

Deception during negotiations is not uncommon.  One study indicated that 28 percent of negotiators lied about a common interest issue while in the process of negotiating (Hoch, Kureuther, Gunther, 2001).  Deception comes in two forms: omission and commission. Lies of omission occur when the full truth about an issue is not disclosed. Lies of commission are committed when information is intentionally misrepresented.  Although people generally feel less guilt associated with lies of omission than lies of commission, ethicists contend that lies of omission and lies of commission “are morally equivalent if the outcomes and the liar’s intentions are the same” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 189).  

“As the benefits of lying rise and the costs of lying fall, negotiators become more likely to lie” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 191).  Generally the potential benefits of lying during negotiation are easily discerned, but estimating the possible costs can be more of a challenge.  Potential costs of deception can be estimated by first, estimating the probability that the deception will be detected; second, calculating the cost of possible detection; and third, considering likelihood and extent of feelings of guilt or remorse that may be experienced (Hoch, et al., 2001).

Armed with the understanding that deception in negotiations is a common practice, it is important for negotiators to guard against deception by adopting certain techniques to reduce their vulnerability during negotiations.  Many people think that they can easily tell when they are being lied to. However, that is rarely the case; “Most people are not very adept at detecting deception” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 194). “Researchers have tried, but failed, to identify one verbal or nonverbal cue to detect deception. Detecting deception relies on a variety of cues that have varying degrees of success at predicting deception” (Schafer, 2017, para. 1).  There are several steps that negotiators can take before, during, and after negotiations to ensure honesty and transparency throughout the process. I will discuss four ways vulnerability to deception can be reduced.

Prior to Negotiations

First, prior to entering a negotiation questions should be identified that are designed to fill in information gaps.  Similar questions should be asked from slightly different perspectives to ensure no knowledge gaps remain. “This repetition will reduce elastic justification and curtail lies of omission.  In many cases, carefully worded questions can yield valuable information—even from the way questions are deflected” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 196).

Second, negotiators should find ways to increase the cost of their partners’ deception.   As mentioned previously, if the cost of lying is low and the payoff is high, there is a higher likelihood that deception will be employed.  If the cost of deception is increased, negotiators are less likely to lie. The cost of deception can be increased during negotiations by “transforming a single interaction into an opportunity for repeated business” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 196).

During Negotiations

Third, studies have demonstrated that negotiators were far less likely to lie when asked direct questions (Hoch, et al., 2001).  “You can reduce the risk of being deceived by lies of omission by asking lots of direct questions at the bargaining table” (PON Staff, 2018, para. 3).  Direct questions are especially important when information or knowledge gaps remain about the subject at issue, or the terms of the agreement. “Be willing to ask lots of open questions (‘what’, ‘how’, ‘why’).  Avoid closed questions that only give a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer” (Hudson, n.d., para. 9).

Fourth, as mentioned previously, recognizing lies is very difficult, and most people overestimate their ability to detect deception.    “Some evidence suggests that people can be trained to detect lies, and that some types of professionals . . . are better than others at detecting lies” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 197).  The ability to detect lies can improve with practice. Generally non-verbal cues such as changes in breathing, increased blinking, or even noting the direction people’s feet are pointed, are more telling than verbal cues.

A couple days ago I was on an oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico while I was studying the textbook chapter about deception in negotiation.  I received a phone call from another pilot who said he would be coming out to the same location where I was, and he asked if I had somewhere else I could go since the heliport was not big enough for two aircraft.  He said that he was going to have to shut down and that he would be on the platform for a while. I informed my passengers and they said they were almost done with their work and that we could leave before the other aircraft arrived, so there would be no issue.  However, when we took off we heard the other aircraft talking to another location on the radio and it was clear that he could have gone there to land! He had overstated his need for me to leave the platform while we coordinated the aircraft movements. I was deceived while we negotiated who would stay on the platform and who would go elsewhere.  As I flew away from the platform I chuckled to myself as I thought about the chapter, Deceptions in Negotiation, that I was reading at the time of this discussion.

I have at times been on the other side of the truth while negotiating.  I have recently started using an app called Letgo to sell some of our household goods and things that we no longer have a use for.  There have been a couple times that prospective buyers have contacted me and offered less than the asking price for the item. In an effort to motivate the buyer to commit to purchasing the item at full asking price I have untruthfully indicated that there are several other people interested.  Hoch, et al., (2001) indicated that negotiators are more likely to use deception during single transactions since a tarnished reputation will have little or no long term effect. I find that has been the case for me.

“Managers should take specific steps to curtail the use of deception by others, and consider guidelines for managing their own temptations to use deception” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 200).

References

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., and Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Hudson, M. (n.d.). Dealing with deception in negotiations. Retrieved from https://www.negotiate.org/your-resources/dealing-with-deception-at-the-negotiation-table

PON Staff. (2018). Learn how to detect lies in negotiation. Retrieved from https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/detecting-lies-of-omission/

Schafer, J. (2017). Detecting deception is possible, but not easy. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/let-their-words-do-the-talking/201712/detecting-deception-is-possible-not-easy