Using Honesty to Foster Association Among Mediators and Shareholders

Introduction

Negotiators are frequently ethically challenged throughout the negotiating process. They must try to avoid deceptive tactics while being aware of the other parties’ negotiation methods. Cramton and Dees define deception as, “any deliberate act or omission by one party taken with the intention of creating or adding support to a false belief in another party” (p. 362).

In negotiation, deception is often common when buying a car or home. For example, the seller may omit to tell the buyer that the car does not include a spare tire. The buyer does not check to see if it has one and later finds out it is missing. This results in the buyer being unhappy with the seller’s deception upon negotiation. Omitting information is a deceptive tactic often used in sales. Negotiators should avoid deceptive tactics at all costs to build an honest long-lasting relationship with stakeholders.

Deceptive Tactics and right principles

Deceptive tactics are commonly used during negotiation however, they are not needed to reach an outcome. Negotiators should avoid the temptation to hide, misguide, or use deceptive tactics even if the other party engages in such negative behavior. According to Provis (2010), “Honesty is unconditional, and a good negotiator should resist the temptation to be dishonest when dealing with a partner whose honesty is questionable” (p. 3).

Deceptive tactics might be tempting for several reasons including feeling in control, or protected but it creates mistrust between the negotiators. For instance, negotiators typically use deceptive tactics such as exaggerated offers, omitted information, misleading facts, or false promises to gain future business opportunities (Volkema, Fleck, and Hofmeister-Toth, 2004). Using such tactics are dishonest and can lead down a bumpy road. Negotiators should assess the situation and always using honesty throughout the process.

Honesty

Remaining honest throughout negotiations is the most ethical practice. Even if a negotiator is unwilling to reveal firm unimportant information at a specific point of the negotiation process, they can be honest with their party instead of using deceptive tactics. Negotiators can still withhold some information for security purposes if they are upfront with their client. For instance, Provis (2010) stated, “A warning to the other party that their information is incomplete is the only one instance of the sort that may be appropriate” (p.5).

Providing a disclosure of stating there is withheld information until a certain date would be acceptable in certain circumstances. In contrast to being honest and proving disclosures, if a negotiator bluffs or makes false commitments it can make the negotiation process worse. For instance, evidence shows that using deceptive tactics can increase costs and conflict levels (Provis, 2010). Remaining honest keeps the negotiation process upfront and a smooth process for both negotiating parties.

Vagueness

In negotiation, being vague or ambiguous is considered deceptive. Vagueness from either negotiator can heavily influence the negotiation because the exact details are not being exposed. For example, if you are interested in buying a house and name a general price but refuse to list desired factors, this would be considered vague. The seller is then at a disadvantage because they won’t know what the buyer’s desires are. Vagueness creates unclear lines about what the buyer/seller wants and ultimately makes negotiation difficult and opens channels for indirect communication (Provis, 2010). Indirect communication can include signals such as a wink or eye glance. Vagueness creates an uncomfortable environment between the buyer and seller which can ultimately make closing a deal near impossible.

Ethics

From an ethical standpoint, remaining honest in negotiations is crucial. Negotiators must consider the other parties standpoint in the negotiation and not take advantage of them. Especially when dealing with cultural negotiations, negotiators must consider major differences. For example, Provis (2010) stated, “Acknowledging them as responsible active subjects involves us paying attention to their actual skills and expectations, rather than assuming that their skills and expectations conform to some general stereotype” (p. 10). Negotiators must be aware of the other parties’ desires, skills, and overall expectations. They cannot assume anything or stereotype because everyone has a unique standpoint. Negotiators must remain honest and open-minded to remain ethical.

Conclusion

Negotiators should avoid deceptive tactics to pursue an honest relationship and fair outcome for both parties. Using deception such as omitting information, misguided facts, vagueness, or lying are dishonest unethical tactics in the negotiating process. Negotiators can be as honest as possible to create an ethical negotiation. In the case that information must be omitted until a certain date, the negotiator must state a disclosure to ensure everything is on the table. Overall, deception should be avoided at all costs and honesty is the best negotiation tactic.