Best Practices in Negotiation - The Nibbler Versus the Camel
There are a number of purportedly scientific ways to study negotiation.
One of them is mathematical modeling of decision making, also known as game theory. This area attempts to quantify the probabilities that A will or will not do X in his bargaining with B.
Game theory was one of the tools used during the Cold War to work through the scenarios in which the superpowers would or would not engage in a nuclear attack.
The problem with scientific approaches is that they don’t adequately measure or predict such human motivations as greed and disgust, nor do they fully take into account the histories of the negotiators. I like to point out the quite unpredictable moves people make when they are engaged in a “nibbling” encounter.
Nibbling, a term coined by Herb Cohen, is trying to improve a deal by getting an extra morsel, often as transactions are culminating. The example of a man shopping for a business suit is offered as an illustration. After he has tried it on, it has been chalked and pinned by the tailor the patron asks which shirt and tie the salesperson would recommend to complement the ensemble.
Enthusiastically, the clerk returns with a crisp shirt and power tie. The customer removes the jacket and pants and asks, “If I buy the suit, will you throw in the shirt and tie?”
At this point the customer seems to be in control. The seller and his tailor are ego-involved in writing up the order. As a percentage of the overall purchase, the shirt and tie are not much extra, at least computed at cost to the store.
All the seller has to do is cut his commission a little, and he has an order. But will he buckle?
Nibbling advocates predict he will, at least often enough to make the gambit a successful one for the customer. They say greed will conquer disgust.
Not necessarily.
There is an expressio Read more »
Filed under: , , , , , | No Comments »

