Deception and Mutual Gains Bargaining: Are they mutually exclusive? Mattias Johansson, Timur Janayev

MGB/INTERGRATIVE/WIN-WIN At least 2 parties Focusing on problem solving Being fair Sharing information Basing proposals on neutral criteria Mutual gain bargaining. Car example: There are at least 2 parties and the have a common understanding for eachother when dealing with the problems they want to resolve. All this lead up to they are focusing on shared interest amd which will result in a mutually satisfying agreement, a win-win situation.

Ethically Ambiguous Tactics Hide information Exaggerate information Change beliefs and perception MGB is often confused for being good, ethical and nice techniques to use when bargaining. But like in every other bargaining technique MBG as well are used to give the negotiator so good deal as possible. When negotiating, one party can simply hide information which could put himself in a lot less beneficial position, in order to get the other party to believe he got those extra benefits on his side, such as more suppliers to chose from, better deals, ect, and when implying this the other party will change his beliefs and perceptions and which will be beneficial for the first party in the negotiation phase. Many argues that these behaviour when misleading others are unethical and should therefore not be used when barganing. But as times it is also even seen as ok by those who oppose using this technique, and it is for example when used in hostage situations, where there are very few ways of balancing the power.

4 principles Separating the people from the problem Focusing on interest, not positions Inventing options for mutual gain Insisting on objective criteria On these four principles is what MGB is built up from, and as seen there is actually nothing here that actually adresses the issue of being ethical or not using deceptive techniques when using the MGB technique when negotiating. And when many people lifts up MGB to be a more ethical and preferred technique to use when negotiating is comes from a more deepseated and fundamental missunderstanding of the idea of MGB.

Misunderstandings with MGB Explain interest – not necessary revealing interests Unacceptable for some acceptable for others “Don´t put all your cards on the table” As mentioned before, the use of MGB is not more ethical and nice than any other technique, and people only tend to believe so because they have misunderstood the concept with MGB. When negotiating you should explain you interest for the other party, but that does not necessarily mean that you should reveal your alternatives in order to keep them for yourself to gain better deals in the long run. (better life quality with 5% pay-rise, when only 2-3% is necessary, hide that) So the belief about revealing everything when using MGB is wrong and should only reveal your interests and not deceive the other party, but it is not saying anything about keeping some information for youself in order to gain benefits. When using deception techniques, both parties need to be aware of not all people are using the MGB technique in the same way and what is unacceptable for some will be acceptable for other so use as a deception. And it is also depending how the different techniques are used (health care 100 vs actual 20) sounds better, but if caought this lie will damage the relationship severely and trust will be lost for future negotiation.

Question The use of deception techniques, is it unethical or ok to use when negotiating?

Thank you for listening!