Turning an adversary into a partner in negotiations

R.M. Boylan
Feb 19
7 min read

Updated: Mar 9

Using Referent Power in Negotiations

R.M. Boylan BSc. M.A.

AI Art Regeneration of man coveting & bullying in a negotiation to get all the money.

Using Referent Power in Negotiations:Turning an adversary into a partner in negotiations

Referent power is derived from the ability of an individual to attract others and build loyalty through personal qualities and relationships. In the context of negotiating with an adversary who exhibits bullying, deceitful, authoritarian, manipulative or violent behavior, referent power can be strategically employed to create a more conducive atmosphere for dialogue.

Strategies to Utilize Referent Power

Building Rapport: Establishing a personal connection can help to humanize the negotiation process. This may involve finding common ground or shared interests that can serve as a basis for dialogue.
Demonstrating Empathy: Acknowledging the adversary's feelings or grievances can defuse hostility. By showing understanding, you may be able to soften their approach and open pathways for negotiation.
Modeling Desired Behavior: Displaying calmness and respect can influence the adversary's behavior. If they see you handling the situation with composure, they may mirror that behavior.

Engaging Individuals with Dark Triad Traits

Dealing with individuals characterized by Machiavellianism, narcissism, or psychopathy presents unique challenges. However, there are strategies that can inspire cooperation rather than conflict:

Appealing to Self-Interest: Highlighting how cooperation can benefit them can be effective. This might involve framing the negotiation in terms of their goals and how partnership can lead to mutual gain.
Creating a Sense of Importance: Individuals with narcissistic traits may respond positively to flattery or recognition of their status. Positioning them as key players or in charge in the negotiation can engage their ego and foster collaboration.
Establishing Boundaries: It is crucial to set clear limits on unacceptable behavior. This not only protects your interests but also establishes a framework for respectful negotiation. This may be tricky with someone who needs to dominate and inflict harm to feel powerful and in control.

Strategies for Cooperative Negotiations

Successful national peace treaties often involve innovative strategies that address the underlying issues while fostering collaboration:

Inclusive Dialogue: Engaging all stakeholders in the negotiation process can create a sense of ownership and commitment to the outcomes.
Third-Party Mediation: Neutral mediators can facilitate discussions and help manage tensions, allowing for a more structured negotiation environment.
Incremental Concessions: Gradually offering concessions can build trust and demonstrate goodwill, paving the way for more significant agreements.

Stepping to Their Side

To effectively step to the side of an adversary, consider the following approaches:

Active Listening: Show genuine interest in their concerns and perspectives to build a foundation of trust.
Identifying Common Goals: Highlighting shared objectives can create a collaborative mindset and reduce adversarial attitudes.
Flexibility in Negotiation: Being willing to adapt your approach or proposals can demonstrate a commitment to finding a mutually beneficial solution.

Trade-offs and Concessions

Negotiation often requires trade-offs. Here are some key considerations:

Understanding Priorities: Knowing what is most important to both parties can help identify areas where concessions can be made without compromising core interests.
Offering Symbolic Concessions: Sometimes, small gestures can have a significant impact on goodwill and can lead to larger agreements.
Establishing a Framework for Future Engagement: Proposing ongoing dialogue or collaboration can help solidify the relationship and encourage future cooperation.

Dark Triad Personality Traits in Leaders

The Dark Triad refers to a trio of personality traits that are often associated with toxic leadership styles: Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Narcissism. While these traits are distinct, they often overlap and can manifest together in individuals, particularly in leadership roles. It is a psychological theory of personality, first published by Delroy, L. Paulhus and Kevin M. Williams in 2002. I have developed a 4 level model which explains an even more in depth understanding.

Machiavellianism

Machiavellianism is characterized by manipulation, exploitation, and a focus on self-interest. Leaders exhibiting this trait are often strategic, cunning, and willing to deceive to achieve their goals. They prioritize results over ethics and may lack concern for the welfare of others.

Psychopathy

Psychopathy involves a lack of empathy, remorse, and emotional depth. Individuals with psychopathic traits are often charming and charismatic but can be impulsive and irresponsible. They may engage in harmful behaviors without regard for the consequences to others. Research suggests that psychopathy is linked to specific brain abnormalities, particularly in the prefrontal cortex and amygdala, which are associated with emotional regulation and empathy (Blair, 2005).

Narcissism

Narcissism is characterized by grandiosity, a need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. Narcissistic leaders often have an inflated sense of self-importance and may exploit others to maintain their self-image. They can be sensitive to criticism and may react with anger or disdain when challenged.

Interrelation of the Dark Triad Traits

While Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Narcissism are viewed as separate constructs, they often overlap in practice. For instance, a leader may exhibit Machiavellian tactics while also displaying narcissistic tendencies, such as a need for admiration. This intersection can create a particularly toxic leadership style, as these traits can reinforce one another.

Relation to Authoritarianism

The Dark Triad traits are often correlated with authoritarian leadership styles. Authoritarian leaders tend to value obedience and control, which aligns with the manipulative nature of Machiavellianism and the impulsivity and lack of empathy found in Psychopathy. Narcissism can also drive authoritarianism, as narcissistic leaders may seek to dominate and maintain power at all costs.

Neuroscientific Underpinnings

Research indicates that individuals with psychopathic traits often exhibit structural and functional abnormalities in specific brain regions. The prefrontal cortex, responsible for decision-making and impulse control, and the amygdala, which plays a crucial role in emotional processing and empathy, are often underdeveloped in those with psychopathy (Raine, 2002). This lack of brain wiring can impair their ability to understand others' perspectives and experience remorse for their actions.

Empathy and Cognitive Reasoning

Lower levels of empathy and cognitive reasoning are common in individuals exhibiting Dark Triad traits. The inability to empathize with others can lead to manipulative and harmful behaviors, as these individuals may not recognize or care about the impact of their actions on others. This is particularly evident in psychopathy, where the lack of emotional connection can result in a complete disregard for societal norms and the feelings of others.

Diagram: The Dark Triad Triangle

The Dark Triad traits can be visualized as a triangle, with each trait occupying a vertex, illustrating their interconnectedness and the potential for co-occurrence in individuals.

References on this article

Boylan, R.M. (2006-2009). Conflicts and considerations comparing Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs to Jane Loevinger's model of ego development for assessing the level of development of a leader. M.A. Leadership Studies.
Blair, R. J. R. (2005). "Responding to the Emotions of Others: Dissociating Forms of Empathy through the Study of Antisocial Personality Disorder." Emotion, 5(1), 1-10.
Raine, A. (2002). "Biosocial Studies of Antisocial and Violent Behavior." Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111(1), 1-10.
Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in Social Power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: "Seizing" and "freezing." Psychological Review, 103(2), 263-283.
Ury, W. (1993). Getting Past No: Negotiating Your Way from Confrontation to Cooperation. New York: Bantam Books.
"Dark Triad". Psychology Today United Kingdom. Retrieved July 6, 2022. First published by Delroy, L. Paulhus and Kevin M. Williams in 2002

References on Negotiation

Boylan, R.M. (2006-2009). Conflicts and considerations comparing Abraham Maslow's

hierarchy of needs to Jane Loevinger's model of ego development for assessing the level of development of a leader. M.A. Leadership Studies.

Blair, R. J. R. (2005). "Responding to the Emotions of Others: Dissociating Forms of Empathy through the Study of Antisocial Personality Disorder." Emotion, 5(1), 1-10.
Braden, G. (2000). The Isaiah Effect. Harmony Books.
Brunsson, N. (2007). The consequences of decision-making. Oxford University Press.
Cialdini, R.B. (1993). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. Harpers Collins

Publishers.

Cooper, D. F., & Chapman, C. B. (2005). Risk Management: A Project Management Approach. Taylor & Francis.
Covey, S. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. (1989). Stephen Covey.
"Dark Triad". Psychology Today United Kingdom. Retrieved July 6, 2022. First published by Delroy, L. Paulhus and Kevin M. Williams in 2002
Deutsch, M., Coleman, P.T. (2000). The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin Books.
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright

(Ed.), Studies in Social Power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
Harvard Business Review. (2019). On Negotiation. Harvard Business Review Press
Harvard Negotiation Project https://www.pon.harvard.edu/tag/the-harvard-negotiation-project/
Hofstede, Geert. (2017). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing values, behaviours, institutions and organizations across nations. A MASCAT Analysis.
Jung, C.G. (2002). Psychology of the Unconscious. Dodd, Mead & Company.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: "Seizing" and "freezing." Psychological Review, 103(2), 263-283.
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2015). Negotiation (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
O’Connor, J. & Prior, R. (1995). Successful selling with NLP: Neuro-linguistic programming the way forward in the new bazaar. Harper Collins Publisher.
Pritchard, C.L. (2001). Risk Management: Concepts and guidance Second edition. ESI International.
Rackham, N. (1988). SPIN Selling. Situation, Problem, Implication, Need-Payoff. McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Raiffa, H. (2002). Negotiation Analysis: The Science and Art of Collaborative Decision Making. Harvard University Press.
Raine, A. (2002). "Biosocial Studies of Antisocial and Violent Behavior." Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111(1), 1-10.
Ries, A. Trout, J. (1981). Positioning : The Battle for your mind. Werner Books.
Salacuse, J.W. (2008). Seven secrets for negotiating with government: How to deal with local, state, national, or foreign governments and come out ahead. AMACOM
Thompson, L. (2014). The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator (6th ed.). Pearson.
Ury, W. (1993). Getting Past No: Negotiating Your Way from Confrontation to Cooperation. New York: Bantam Books.
Weiss, J. (2016). Harvard Business Review Guide to. Negotiating: Take the Lead Manage Conflict Get to Yes. Harvard Business Review Press