Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Faculty & Research
  • Faculty
  • Research
  • Featured Topics
  • Academic Units
  • …→
  • Harvard Business School→
  • Faculty & Research→
Publications
Publications
  • September 2007
  • Article
  • Harvard Business Review

Investigative Negotiation

By: Deepak Malhotra and Max H. Bazerman
  • Format:Print
ShareBar

Abstract

This article includes a one-page preview that quickly summarizes the key ideas and provides an overview of how the concepts work in practice along with suggestions for further reading. Negotiators often fail to achieve results because they channel too much effort into selling their own position and too little into understanding the other party's perspective. To get the best deal--or, sometimes, any deal at all--negotiators need to think like detectives, digging for information about why the other side wants what it does. This investigative approach entails a mind-set and a methodology, say Harvard Business School professors Malhotra and Bazerman. Inaccurate assumptions about the other side's motivations can lead negotiators to propose solutions to the wrong problems, needlessly give away value, or derail deals altogether. Consider, for example, the pharmaceutical company that deadlocked with a supplier over the issue of exclusivity in an ingredient purchase. Believing it was a ploy to raise the price, the drug maker upped its offer--unsuccessfully. In fact, the supplier was balking because a relative's company needed a small amount of the ingredient to make a local product. Once the real motivation surfaced, a compromise quickly followed. Understanding the other side's motives and goals is the first principle of investigative negotiation. The second is to figure out what constraints the other party faces. Often when your counterpart's behavior appears unreasonable, his hands are tied somehow, and you can reach agreement by helping overcome those limitations. The third is to view onerous demands as a window into what the other party prizes most--and use that information to create opportunities. The fourth is to look for common ground; even fierce competitors may have complementary interests that lead to creative agreements. Finally, if a deal appears lost, stay at the table and keep trying to learn more. Even if you don't win, you can gain insights into a customer's future needs, the interests of similar customers, or the strategies of competitors.

Keywords

Knowledge Acquisition; Knowledge Use and Leverage; Negotiation Process; Negotiation Tactics; Motivation and Incentives; Perspective; Pharmaceutical Industry

Citation

Malhotra, Deepak, and Max H. Bazerman. "Investigative Negotiation." Harvard Business Review 85, no. 9 (September 2007).
  • Find it at Harvard
  • Purchase

About The Authors

Deepak Malhotra

Negotiation, Organizations & Markets
→More Publications

Max H. Bazerman

Negotiation, Organizations & Markets
→More Publications

More from the Authors

    • 2022
    • Behavioral Science & Policy

    Leadership & Overconfidence

    By: Don A Moore and Max H. Bazerman
    • 2022
    • Faculty Research

    Complicit: How We Enable the Unethical and How to Stop

    By: Max H. Bazerman
    • August 2022
    • Faculty Research

    Rocket Science

    By: Joshua Schwartzstein and Deepak Malhotra
More from the Authors
  • Leadership & Overconfidence By: Don A Moore and Max H. Bazerman
  • Complicit: How We Enable the Unethical and How to Stop By: Max H. Bazerman
  • Rocket Science By: Joshua Schwartzstein and Deepak Malhotra
ǁ
Campus Map
Harvard Business School
Soldiers Field
Boston, MA 02163
→Map & Directions
→More Contact Information
  • Make a Gift
  • Site Map
  • Jobs
  • Harvard University
  • Trademarks
  • Policies
  • Accessibility
  • Digital Accessibility
Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College