Tag: game theory

When everything feels like it must be done now, you risk:

1. Skipping Preparation: Under time pressure, vital research, planning, and strategy often get pushed aside.
2. Overlooking Creative Options: Rushing leaves no space to explore out-of-the-box solutions that could unlock more value.
3. Damaging Trust: In haste, you might come across as pushy or inattentive to your counterpart’s needs—undermining long-term relationships.

Sometimes speed is necessary, but if every negotiation feels urgent, you’re leaving untapped value on the table. Slow down, plan properly, and watch how your outcomes improve.

If both parties in a negotiation end up better off than before the deal, that’s a win-win, right?

Wrong.

A common misconception about win-win leads some negotiators to aim low, focus on their break points, and rush to compromise without fully advocating for their interests. The other party gets a favorable deal (the “win”), while the negotiator walks away a “wimp”, settling for a merely “good enough” outcome. If one side’s gain comes at the other side’s expense, it’s a “wimp-win”, even if both end up better off than before.

But true win-win isn’t just about improving the status quo for both sides (without that, there shouldn’t be a deal) — it’s about maximizing value for both sides.

The real focus isn’t ‘before’ vs. ’after’, but comparing two alternative outcomes. If one deal option benefits both parties more than an alternative option, you’ve achieved a true win-win.

How is this done? By uncovering value differentials in your respective priorities, motivations, and constraints.

• Can one side offer something inexpensive to them but valuable to the other?
• Can timing or risks be adjusted for mutual benefit?

Turning wimp-win into true win-win negotiations requires curiosity, creativity, and a collaborative mindset.

Ready to transform your negotiation approach? Message me directly — let’s create value instead of wimping out on your next negotiation.

I enjoy the occasional poker game. There’s something fascinating about the strategy, the reading of subtle cues, and the delicate balance of risk and reward. It’s a game that sharpens your ability to analyze others, manage your emotions, and think a few steps ahead — skills that undoubtedly translate to the negotiation table.

But there is real danger in taking the ‘poker face’ approach too far in negotiation.

While “information is power”, and we advocate being deliberate about what you share, holding a ‘poker face’ in negotiations often:

• Fails to signal progress, leaving the other side in the dark.
• Misses opportunities to foster constructive behavior.
• Creates an adverserial atmosphere that stifles trust.
• Overlooks chances to exchange valuable information for better outcomes
• Commonly leads to ignoring or misinterpreting important signals from the other side.

The most effective negotiators, as rated by their peers, adopt a prudently cooperative communication style. Of course, every negotiation is unique, requiring “situational strategies” tailored to the case and communication approaches carefully calibrated to the people involved

What’s your take? How do you balance holding back versus sharing information in your negotiations?