Module 3 Journal Article Analysis

Analyzed paper:
Aykac, T., Wilken, R., Jacob, F., & Prime, N. (2017). Why teams achieve higher negotiation
profits than individuals: The mediating role of deceptive tactics.

Definition
Deceptive negotiation tactics mean the ethical-ambiguous, disruptive negotiation
tactics that negotiators use to achieve truth misrepresentation (Aykac, Wilken, Jacob, and
Prime, 2017). According to the way of misrepresentation, deceptive tactics can be divided
into two categories: deception by commission and deception by omission.
Summary
In this paper, Aykac, et al. (2017) were trying to analyze the difference on the usage of
deceptive negotiation tactics between the team and individual negotiators, and then to
discover the influence of this difference on negotiation profits. Information advantage usually
means stronger negotiation power. By applying deceptive negotiation tactics to hide or distort
the truth, negotiators can enlarge their information advantage over their opponents, which can
be utilized to improve their negotiation profits. By analyzing the data sets which collect the
results on several student-simulated negotiations between sellers and buyers, Aykac et al.
(2017) verified that deceptive tactics application can improve negotiation profits, and team
negotiators are more likely to use deceptive tactics. More detailly, deception by commission
creates more negotiation profits than deception by omission, and different usage between
team and individual is more obvious in passive misrepresentation than active
misrepresentation. Finally, they concluded that team negotiators apply more deceptive tactics
than individual negotiators, which brings the team better negotiation profits.
Analysis
In the paper of Aykac et al. (2017), the definition of deceptive negotiation tactics is
clearly explained. Also, this paper focused on the usage behavior difference between
different types of negotiators, as well as the influence of deceptive tactics on the final
negotiation outcome. By reading this article, we can understand that the critical concept of
deceptive negotiation tactics is creating information advantage by misrepresenting the truth,
which would help the negotiators on acquiring stronger negotiation power over their
opponents.
Based on the observation of this analysis, when encountering a negotiator team, we
should pay more attention to see if they have intentionally hidden any critical information.
Shonk (2020) has suggested several ways to reduce deception during the negotiation process,
such as clarifying your shared benefits with your opponents, pointing out the limitation of
your opponents’ alternatives, and confirming that the opponents will their goals. Also, though
we should focus on integrative negotiation strategies during the value creation stage of the
negotiation process when the schedule reaches to value claiming stage, we should consider
disruptive strategies, and may apply deceptive tactics if necessary. However, the extent of
usage needs to be carefully evaluated, especially for the application of deception by
commission, as it can raise ethical concerns.
Meanwhile, this study also has its limitations. Firstly, the test data is collected from
the seller-buyer negotiation situation, which is a disruptive negotiation condition. Therefore,
disruptive negotiation strategies like deceptive tactics can be more effective, which may not
be good enough to infer the situation in integrative negotiation. Secondly, to limit the
variable, the current study only focused on the deception application and negotiator size
change from the buyer side. If the study can also analyze the effect of the sellers’ aspect, the
conclusion will be more persuasive. Thirdly, the study didn’t pay too much attention to the
negative impact of deceptive tactic usage. For example, applying such ethnical ambiguous
negotiation tactics should impair the reputation of the negotiator, which might cause a loss in
the future. Finally, the study just considered a one-time negotiation, for negotiation situations
that require several iterations, I think the deceptive tactics will gradually become ineffective.
To summarize, we should realize the positive influence of deceptive tactic application
and consider its utilization under necessary conditions. But the ethical impact of the
deception cannot be ignored as well, so deception by omission could be a safer choice while
considering applying the deceptive tactics.

Reference
Aykac, T., Wilken, R., Jacob, F., & Prime, N. (2017). Why teams achieve higher negotiation
profits than individuals: The mediating role of deceptive tactics. The Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, 32(4), 567-579.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-10-2015-0179
Shonk, K. (2020). Deceptive Tactics in Negotiation: How to Ward Them Off. Retrieved from
https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/deceptive-tactics-in-
negotiation-how-to-ward-them-off/