A recent blog post (dated August 21,2023) by the staff at Harvard’s PONS (Program on Negotiation) concludes that while sincere anger may be advantageous in a negotiation, appearing to be happy may or may not be disadvantageous in a negotiation:
…When we display anger, our counterparts tend to view us as powerful and intimidating. Consequently, they make more concessions and lower their demands.
On the flip side, negotiators who appear happy tend to do worse than others. Because happiness and contentedness appear to signal satisfaction with how a negotiation is going, counterparts tend to demand more of happy negotiators. (Id.)
In Emotions in Negotiation- Insincere and Real , the PON staff writer reports on a study conducted by Han-Ying of the Duke-National University of Singapore Graduate Medical School in Singapore and Al K. C. Au of the same university involving two different experiments. In the first, the participants were told that they would negotiate via instant messaging. They were not told that their negotiating partner was one of the experimenters. Before the negotiations began, the participants were told that either their partner was “ (1) since and frank about their emotions; (2) insincere and manipulative; or (3) unpredictable when engaging with others. “ (Id.)
During the negotiations, the participants were kept apprised of their opponent’s emotions. They were told whether their opponent was happy, or angry with how the negotiations were progressing.
What the researchers found:
When negotiators perceived their counterpart’s emotional display to be authentic, they conceded more to angry counterparts than to happy ones. But when negotiators believed their counterpart’s feelings were not authentic, they made fewer concessions to counterparts who acted angry than to those who acted happy. Negotiators made similar levels of concessions to those whose expressions of anger or happiness were ambiguous. (Id.)
The researchers found that while a false display of anger could backfire, a false display of happiness could or could not be beneficial. (Id.) Thus, faking anger during a negotiation may not be the best tool to pull out of your toolbox.
On a somewhat related note, this blog also discusses another study involving anxiety in making the first offer. Researchers Ashleigh Shelby Rosette of Duke University, Shirli Kopelman of the University of Michigan and JeAnna Lanza Abbott of the University of Houston found that while it is beneficial to make the first offer in a negotiation, and thus to set the “anchor”, many negotiators have anxiety about doing so. Thus, while studies have shown that the one who does make the first offer tends to perform better financially, the anxious negotiator who does make the first offer tends to be less satisfied with the outcome even though she obtained a superior result. ( The reason for the anxiety is the fear of being taken advantage of.) (Id. at 2.)
The takeaway: do not fake anger when negotiating and do not be anxious about making the first demand thereby setting the “anchor”!
… Just something to think about.
-------------------------------------
Do you like what you read?
If you would like to receive this blog automatically by e mail each week, please click on one of the following plugins/services:
and for the URL, type in my blog post address: http://www.pgpmediation.com/feed/ and then type in your e mail address and click "submit".
Copyright 2021 Phyllis G. Pollack and www.pgpmediation.com, 2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Phyllis G. Pollack and www.pgpmediation.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
