Comment by nnq | Hacker News Reader

Comment by nnq | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Don't you think that by showing that you have negotiation skills, even by employing more or less obvious ploys, you actually show the other part you can play the game just as well as they can? ...so they can stop trying to out-game you and they can start thinking about offers that really make sense both for you and for them.

...I think a lot of business deals start to make more sense once you "de-gamificate" them: you show the other part that "gaming" tricks won't work in this negotiation because you're on the same level as they are on using them, so both parties can now concentrate on a compromise offer that provides the best "real value" for both! I know, "make more sense" doesn't mean "make more money", but you end up with more satisfied customers and you end up doing business in segment of the market where there's less "gaming" to waste your energy on, so you can concentrate on improving and diversifying products or forging better customer relations.

Maybe the best way to "win" a negotiation is to "kill" it, i.e. turn it into something that's no longer a negotiation, where it's obvious that no one side can "win", no fucking way, so both parties can concentrate on the best possible compromise. (Yeah, the "pro gamers" will never want to do business with you again an will try to keep you away from any of their future businesses and negotiations, because your ways are "bad for business", but maybe this is not the segment you want to play in in the first place!)

Don't you think that by showing that you have negotiation skills, even by employing more or less obvious ploys, you actually show the other part you can play the game just as well as they can? ...so they can stop trying to out-game you and they can start thinking about offers that really make sense both for you and for them.

...I think a lot of business deals start to make more sense once you "de-gamificate" them: you show the other part that "gaming" tricks won't work in this negotiation because you're on the same level as they are on using them, so both parties can now concentrate on a compromise offer that provides the best "real value" for both!

Yes, and that's what I have a problem with. I believe (very naively, I realise) that negotiations should _start_ with trying to find the "compromise offer that provides the best "real value"". What you seem to be suggesting (if I understand you correctly) is that one should first try to con the opposing party unless they're in on the game, in which case you move on to a "proper" negotiation. Whenever I see someone trying to do that to me, my immediate impulse is to kill the negotiation and walk away right there (perhaps go try to find someone less slimy to deal with). And I do realise that this can result in me losing out and I probably wouldn't last long in business, but cheap manipulation is something I just can't stomach. I guess that's why I'm a developer and not a businessman...

Maybe the best way to "win" a negotiation is to "kill" it, i.e. turn it into something that's no longer a negotiation, where it's obvious that no one side can "win", no fucking way, so both parties can concentrate on the best possible compromise.

That pretty much has been my "tactic" in the past. I realise that this means I miss out on dealing with the "pro gamers", but, well, fuck'em.

> is that one should first try to con the opposing party unless they're in on the game

I don't say the should, but they always try to do if they think they can get away with it! Now, "con" is a relative term, and I don't say you should "walk away right there", no f way! But if you show them that you too have "gaming" skills to match their league, some will just drop the game and go to a "fair compromise" mode, which is the mode I like doing business in. What I call a "pro gamer" is someone that will never drop out of the gaming mode (or at least drop to "lower gaming mode" where it's obvious we're looking for a compromise that works well enough for both side although nobody really "wins") either because they are better than most others at "gaming" and they know it, or because they just enjoy gaming for gaming's sake...

"Don't you think that by showing that you have negotiation skills, even by employing more or less obvious ploys, you actually show the other part you can play the game just as well as they can?"

No, because automatically rejecting the first offer doesn't show that you have negotiation skills, it shows that you're just cargo-culting a list of negotation tactics.

But the person across the table may be trying the same, and often is.

A lot of it is situational as well. If you cargo-cult a list of negotiation tactics for long enough with a souvenir vendor, you might actually get quite close to their reserve price (they're quite used to playing the game, quite enjoy it and will see a great opportunity to upsell you a whole lot of other bargain-priced items starting from even more inflated prices.).

If you try the flinch in a serious business meeting, you've just made yourself look out of your depth, even if it's a convincing flinch. And whilst creating "higher authorities" to check with or appearing uninterested might encourage the other party to rush in with a more appealing offer, if they're competent and not desperate it'll probably make them less willing to show their hand (why would they negotiate with you if you're not willing and able to do it?)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com