Fairness? In Negotiation? It Just Doesn’t Exist!
Being fair suggests compromise; that you are OK settling for for less! WTF! Negotiation is fundamentally about reaching an agreement that serves 'your' best interests. If not you're not negotiating.
The Weekly Walkaway highlights negotiation in its ‘good’, ‘bad’ and sometimes ‘downright ugly’ forms. Issue No. 73 (12th April 2024).
📢 Stronger Negotiation. Bigger Wins. Better Deals.
Every conversation is a negotiation. Are you maximising your value? Learn how to negotiate strategically, close better deals, and increase your success rate.
✅ Boost negotiation success and close more deals
✅ Develop a repeatable, structured approach
✅ Turn tough conversations into win-win outcomes
💡 More confidence. More control. More wins.
Thought of The Week
Fairness? In Negotiation? It Just Doesn’t Exist!
Oxford Dictionary definition - ‘treating someone in a way that is right or reasonable and not allowing personal opinions to influence your judgment.’
You can tell, I don’t believe in fairness.
I used to. I used to believe that if I acted in a fair and reasonable way then my counterpart would do also. The law of reciprocity.
I was wrong.
Fair - free from self-interest, deception, injustice, or favouritism
By being fair and reasonable I had in fact been creating the opposite effect.
They believed I had more to give!
Like a teenager I was arrogant in my lack of knowledge and experience. I was ignorant. I was not consciously competent.
In fact when I sold my recruitment business and pivoted into negotiation consulting with The Gap Partnership all those years ago I started out as a trainer, following their bible of what to say and when. There was a part where I had to say ‘there is no such thing as fairness in negotiation’. Or something like that..
I said it but in truth I didn’t agree with it. I didn’t like it.
But, just like a teenager, when I experienced ‘it’, I understood.
It wasn’t until I started negotiation consulting did I truly understand why. It was a Union negotiation and I remember it well.
I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. - Confucius
What have I learnt?
Fairness suggests that you and your counterpart are following an agreed set of rules and are free from any form of self-interest or favouritism.
Really? Can you, hand on heart, tell me that you are free from any self or organisational interest? C’mon.. be honest.. I call bullshit!
No, I didn’t think so.
Nor are they.
And, who’s rules are you following?
Theirs, and you will be controlled by their self interest
Yours, and you will control them for your own self interest
Remember Walkawayers: There are No Rules In Negotiation!
Oliver Twist and the famous quote ‘Please sir, can I have some more?’ serves to highlight the absence of fairness in negotiation.
Oliver's request for more food, is denied by the authority figure, Mr. Bumble.
From Oliver's perspective, his request seems reasonable and fair, considering his hunger.
However, Mr. Bumble's response reflects his priority in maintaining control.
Negotiation is fundamentally about reaching an agreement that serves your interests. If not, why are you even negotiating? You might as well just say ‘Yes’.
Remember: Stop thinking of the minimum you need and start thinking of the maximum they could give you!
FACT: Adhering to a sense of fairness will be detrimental to you achieving your goals.
As a negotiator your primary focus is on maximising your outcomes, whether it's securing the best deal or advancing yours or your company’s own interests.
This will involve leveraging power dynamics and exploiting weaknesses.
The fact that we all know ‘negotiators’ who use tactics, who bluff and even misrepresent facts to gain an advantage, should further illustrate the disconnect between your sense of fairness and theirs.
Perceptions of fairness influence the process and outcomes and your sense of fairness will be used to influence your perceptions and behaviours.
Your counterpart will use fairness against you.
Why?
Because it is in their interest, dummy! To manipulate you!
It is one of the most powerful emotional triggers used to change your perceptions and behaviours.
Consider this: When you were not sharing that chocolate bar with your brother or sister when you were a child and you eat it without offering any what did your parents say?
‘Yeah, go on. Tease them too. Eat it in their face!’
Or
‘Be fair, share your chocolate. If you don’t share you will be punished’.
No one likes to feel that they’ve been unfair. It’s hard wired into us from our earliest childhood experiences. It feels bad, naughty and makes us uncomfortable.
It makes us want to move, to make a concession, to make the feeling go-away.
‘That is unfair.’
‘Your company is so arrogant. You’re being unfair.’
‘Your proposal goes against all sense of what is fair and right.’
‘Why would you do that? That’s so unfair. We’ve known each other for so long.’
What is a fair deal?
Is it meeting half-way? Or splitting the difference, maybe?
OMG! Is this what you’ve been told ‘WIN - WIN’ is?
Jeez Louise!
No! C’mon guys.. That is not negotiation. That is called compromise!
Any trained negotiator knows that if you say ‘lets meet in the middle’ or ‘lets split difference’ then they know you can do that number.. so.. they will split the difference from that number, not your original.
There is no place for fairness in negotiation.
Win-Win is not fair. You don’t just cut the deal down the middle and say ‘you take that half and I take the other’.
Being fair is not splitting the difference. It just suggests you are OK reaching a compromise or agreeing halfway between two positions.
What you are saying is that you are OK settling for less than you could have achieved.
Who the hell wants to be mediocre? Surely you want to strive for the best outcome.
Want to know how?
Are you enjoying this article?
The Weekly Walkaway is a reader-supported publication. Support our work, consider becoming a full paid subscriber, for just £1 per week.
Thank you for supporting the community.
Never split the difference and remember, there is no such thing as WIN - WIN!
Win-Win just doesn’t exist.
You will win but they will win much, much more. That is the truth of Win-Win!
Unless you are a better, skilled, negotiator and or have more power than them, then they will win but you will win much, much more!
That is the truth of Win-Win.
What is fair to them I can assure you will not be fair to you. There will always be a proportional distribution based on your negotiation skill and the use of power.
There is a huge difference between the value of fairness in your personal life and the abuse of fairness in negotiations.
There is no place for fairness in negotiation!
That union negotiation.
I remember it so well. It was then I realised what I thought as fair and right was most certainly not what ‘they’ thought was fair.
And they shouted loud. Used the press. Called our ‘fair’ proposals ‘unfair’!
And even if they did agree with my sense of fairness, with our proposals, they wouldn’t have agreed because it just wasn’t in their interest.
So what?! OK, let’s take the current UK rail strikes as an example.
My sense of fairness requires a rail system that is;
1. Modern
2. Customer-focused
3. Not going to hold me to ransom over the holidays
The rail union, The RMT’s sense of fairness suggests;
1. Secure jobs
2. Higher pay
3. Better working conditions
Theirs and mine are perfectly ‘fair’. But on initial inspection, they are counter to each other.
Take my No1. A modern system. I’m talking ‘bullet train’ modern.
Modernisation ‘usually’ means fewer people, tech investment and Upskilling.
I appreciate all three would negatively impact their No1; to secure jobs. And yes, it would also negatively impact The Union’s membership numbers and, therefore, its business model.
Drill down, though, and interestingly those who would remain would benefit from higher pay and better conditions due to the availability of tech investment and up-skilling. Which would improve my No2 and help towards preventing my No3.
Oh, and another thing, modernisation requires design and build.
Both increase jobs and investment, which have a positive impact on the economy and, therefore, on the people ‘The Union’ is fairly supporting.
Although, yes, those people may now be differently skilled and so differently employed, and yes, they may now be paying members of a different union.
So it seems it’s not in the Union’s interest to modernise because they risk losing paying members.
If this is the case, then negotiations will not align and will focus on positions (pay), not the issues.
This is why tough, hard and cold techniques are employed in the struggle over the WIN - LOSE scenario of who wins the battle of what is ‘fair’.
Fairness just becomes a matter of negotiating the issues (modernisation), not the positions (higher pay).
This would require longer and much more complex negotiations, which would, in turn, require years of planning and cooperation.
Working together to solve each other's issues.
This would take empathy, active listening, collaboration and trust. Not fairness!
Parties may be more willing to cooperate and reach agreements if they perceive the process as fair, even if the substance of the negotiation itself is driven by self-interest.
In mathematics, at last count, there are 21 mathematical definitions of fairness. So, if there is no one definition of fairness, then there are also no clear agreements on which definition to apply…
Did you enjoy this?
Thank you for supporting the community.