When Strategy and Tactic Clash: Applying a Soft Strategy and Making the First Offer in Negotiations

Abstract

This study joins a growing body of research emphasizing variables contributing to a negotiation second-mover advantage, versus classic anchoring research suggesting that negotiators anchor their proposal by offering first in negotiations. In this article, we examine how negotiation strategy choice affects negotiations. In five studies, we examined how relationship and product value affect the negotiation strategy choice. Moreover, our results suggest that a “soft” strategic approach might affect the first offer and preferences in negotiations, and accordingly, show disadvantages of offering first. Specifically, in these studies, we showed that when employing a “soft” strategy (and/or facing a close friend and/or negotiating over a low-value product), there might be a preference for offering second in negotiations; and/or over-compromising by engaging in “Maximum-Cooperativeness, Minimum-Assertiveness” behavior more, so than when employing other strategies (and/or facing a stranger and/or negotiating over a high-value product). Importantly, when employing a “soft” strategy, sellers frequently made lower first offers than (or on a par with) buyers. Consequently, both parties should have offered second, as their counterparts would have made a higher-value offer.

Keywords: anchoring, decision-making, first offer, negotiation, strategy