Types of Negotiators

Three basic kinds of negotiators have been identified by researchers involved in The Harvard Negotiation Project. These types of negotiators are: Soft negotiator, hard negotiator, and principled negotiator.

HARD NEGOTIATOR

The competitive negotiator sees any situation as a contest of wills in which the side that takes the more extreme positions and holds out longer fares better.
The competitive negotiator moves psychologically against the other person with behavior designed to unnerve the opponent. Competitive negotiators expect similar behavior from their opponents and therefore mistrust them.
Competitive negotiators tend to employ a strategy which often includes; high initial demand, imited disclosure of information regarding facts and one’s own preferences, few and small concessions, threats and arguments.
Empirical research shows a significant positive relationship between a negotiator’s original demand and his payoff
To the extent that the success of a negotiation strategy is measured by the payoff in a single negotiation involving the division of limited resources between two parties, studies of simulated negotiations suggest that the competitive strategy yields better results than other strategies for the negotiator

SOFT NEGIOATOR

The cooperative or soft negotiator initiates granting concessions in order to create both a moral obligation to reciprocate and a relationship built on trust that is conducive to achieving a fair agreement.
The cooperative negotiator does not view making concessions as a necessity resulting from a weak bargaining position or a loss of confidence in the value of her case. Rather, she values concessions as an affirmative negotiating technique designed to capitalize on the opponent’s desire to reach a fair and just agreement and to maintain an accommodative working relationship.
Proponents of the cooperative strategy believe that negotiators are motivated not only by personal or competitive desires to maximize their own utilities, but also by collectivistic desires to reach a fair solution.
Cooperative negotiators assert that the competitive strategy often leads to resentment between parties and a breakdown of negotiations.
Cooperative negotiators expect opponents to reciprocate with concessions of similar size. Cooperative strategies would include any strategies that aim to develop trust between the parties and that focus on the expectation that the opponent will match concessions ungrudgingly.
The major weakness of the cooperative approach is its vulnerability to exploitation by the competitive negotiator.

PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATOR

It is a strategy largely based on problem-solving or integration. Issues are decided on their merits rather than through haggling process focused on what each side says it will or won’t do. The theory suggests that you look for mutual gains wherever possible, and that where your interests conflict, you should insist that the result be based on some fair standards independent of the will of either side.
The style is hard on the merits, soft on the people. It employs no tricks or posturing. There is no war-like mentality to determine a winner and a loser. You obtain what you are entitled to while still remaining decent.
This is not a concession-based strategy that seeks to divide a fixed pie; rather, it maximizes the parties’ potential for problem solving in order to increase the joint benefit and expand the pie.
The principled negotiator strives to identify problem-solving solutions which are not readily perceived.