The modern approach to negotiation has always emphasized the use of integrative bargaining where both parties aim towards win-win results. The parties involved in negotiation greatly use this strategy acting as co-operators, aim at separating people from the problem, and concentrate on the existing interests rather than their counterparts’ opinion while trying to increase the size of the pie. However, the model used by Donald Trump in negotiations greatly conflicts the modern approach (Kapoutsis & Volkema, 2019). He usually applies competitiveness over cooperation, uses threats against his competitors and prefers zero-sum game over the win-win situation in negotiations.
Trump has always described his style as setting his goal too high to get the bigger chunk of the bargain while making it straightforward and simple. He has been described by many as being unethical, ill-prepared, impulsive, a great exaggerator, bluff and a bully against his rivals (Kupfer Schneider, 2019). Threats and bullying have the potential of increasing the level of tension between people and in turn, halt possible negotiation between them. Trump’s combative style carries unique features, especially on a short term basis. As many experts would not term him as an ideal negotiator, in brand marketing he has proven to be an astute salesman. His tactics in salesmanship have even won praises from his predecessor former aide (Kogan, 2019). By basing the argument on those skills, the paper digs deep into the unique negotiation tactics Trump has used before and during his reign as the American President. From debates, interviews and excerpts from his autobiography , The Art of the Deal , the paper try to look at how Trump has applied his style of negotiation, its weaknesses and how it compares with the modern approach.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Timing and High Balling
Timing has been a key factor in Trump’s art of deal-making proving effectiveness in some of his major purchases. Donald Trump entered negotiations at their initial stage before his competitors could know about the deal, applying his skills and in most cases get the better part of the bargain. Quick decision making has allowed him to get into any deal more quickly as his competitors contemplate on the viability of the project. Negotiation experts have greatly disputed timing as the major contributor to the outcome of the deal (Richard Shell, 2019). Case studies carried out on the success of Trump’s acquisition of properties and the inability of his rivals to grasp those opportunities could generate an understanding of the assumed topic in theories and practices involved in negotiations. It is also important to understand the nature and impact of his intuition as a major contributor to his negotiation skills.
Authority and Brand Marketing
Aristotle’s arguments claim that a person’s credibility is one of the factors that form the basis for people’s conviction. Aristotle also argues that credibility helps a person to portray a picture of carrying the interests of his/her audience through sharing and affirming their prejudices or desires. In his business career, Trump has extensively used brand marketing in seeking buyers of his apartments (Kupfer Schneider, 2019). Many of the properties he owns bear his name ‘Trump’ and even leased it to other businesspeople. In negotiation, it is very vital to give a positive side of the deal when attracting another dealmaker. In every property Trump has built, he has taunted them as the best in terms of luxury. Many people have come to associate the name with prestige and quality. The branding of TRUMP has given him an edge before entering into any kind of negotiation (Kupfer Schneider, 2019). The clients are mentally prepared to part with a large sum when buying his house units or seeking services from his hotels. The counterpart is well aware that he/she is not entering into a deal with any other dealmaker but with an accomplished brand.
Knowing one’s Audience
In some of the negotiations Donald Trump has engaged with, his goal has not always been to win over and change the mind of his counterpart. Instead, he has used calculated maneuvers in applying his negotiation skills to use the results in boosting his ratings and appealing to a particular group of audience. At the early stage of his presidency, many people were provoked to offer responses to some of his controversial statements (Capehart, 2015). A good example is a Mexican president who stood his ground in refusing to commit Mexico in the building of the border wall despite Trump’s insistence. After some time, many have learned the need to give a blind eye to some of his proclamations and bullying. This is after realizing that much of his statements were aimed at pleasing a particular segment of the population (Capehart, 2015). Trump has continued to use public pronouncements and tweets not necessary to enter into a negotiation but to appeal to his support base. For this reason, Trump has rarely offered apologies or shown regret over those statements.
Knowing one’s Market
Understanding one’s clientele helps in deciding the bars to set when entering any negotiation. Donald Trump started his career as a real estate tycoon by moving to upstate Manhattan (Dreher, 2016). First, he had to know the political environment, the laws governing building and construction and where to source capital to undertake his projects. Using such information he was able to know what to present and the demands to make before making any deal. New York City is a major financial capital in the U.S has the highest number of high-income earners, millionaires, and billionaires (Dreher, 2016). This is likewise to other major cities across America and the world in general. By studying the social dynamics of New York, Chicago and major cities where he has set up major buildings, Trump has presented prestige and luxury to clients attracting many upscale dwellers in those cities thus giving him a better deal for his apartments and hotels. Some of these buildings include the Trump Tower and Trump International in New York City. He has also hugely applied these tactics in surviving and winning in his political career. He has always complained of the social implications the U.S has suffered by having open borders with Mexico. Trump has always portrayed himself as a true American patriot who has its interest (Dreher, 2016). That might be the reason as to why he has severally refused to enter into negotiations with Mexico for less restrictive border rules. Trump has also complained of other countries exploiting the U.S in terms of trade. He has specifically lashed at China and the European Union in taking advantage of the United State. Efforts by those countries to renegotiate with him have borne no fruits as Trump has insisted that American interests should come first. He also understands the benefit those countries reap from trading with the U.S. This has also contributed to preventing many of them from taking retaliatory actions.
Thinking big
Trump insisted on the importance of looking at the bigger picture in negotiation. Since deal-making is a give and take situation, one should rarely accept the first offer. Closing on the first offer may mean using persuasion rather than negotiation and making the counterpart get a raw deal (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). Thinking big may also mean stating a bigger offer to allow for bargaining. Trump has managed to strike better deals by avoiding first offers and offering room for bargaining.
Protecting the downside
Trump may also be termed as pragmatist and a realist. Although the negotiator needs to think big, Trump emphasizes the need to put more consideration into the downside of any negotiation. The negotiator sets a limit on the lower side so that he can know when to pause or stop. According to him, various elements can lead one to make the best deal. There is the Negotiating Envelope expressed in other terms as Zone of Possible Agreement, which will lead to Most Desired Outcomes. In protecting the downside, however, the negotiator needs the Least Acceptable Alternative which means the lowest point one can reach in a negotiation. In his book, The Art of the Deal , Trump asserts that one needs to go into the deal while expecting and planning for the worst because with such a mentality, the worst often takes care of itself (Trump & Schwartz, 2009).
Seeking Leverage
For the purchases he has made over the years, Trump has always sought to get an upper hand before the negotiations start. By gathering the information beforehand about the financial status of the seller, he has in many cases acquired the properties way lower than the prevailing market price. Trump has stated that the biggest mistake a negotiator can do is try showing desperation when entering into a deal (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). This gives the counterpart an easy way of attacking and getting the best. By capitalizing on that, Trump has managed to find a leeway by employing abrasive tactics like quoting price too high and seeking information on the property or the owner beforehand. Trump has always been super aggressive in his expectations and always exhibits the image of a big dreamer. When many investors were hesitant to venture in Manhattan, he proved himself to be the man for the job (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). In trying to match such dreams and strike a deal, many have been forced to offer Trump the better part of the bargain.
Being a Promoter and an Enthusiast
Trump's enthusiasm and promotional skills have made him strike major deals for his business, political career and the country. Being a shrewd businessman has taught him the skill of setting eyes on a certain goal and achieving it despite the prevailing conditions (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). Some of the properties he has acquired or put up came as a result of a tough fight and getting the word out. He has known one way of achieving this is feeding the media with information about some of the projects he is undertaking and how they stand out from the rest (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). The much-hyped features for a commodity tend to attract higher bids as has been evident in the number of buyers his apartments have attracted. As a president, Trump has applied this strategy in enforcing some of the policies both on a national and international scene. While advocating for funding of the border wall, he has always marketed the idea as of best interest to the safety of the American people. He has pointed out how the wall will in a great percentage cut the number of crimes as a result of having undocumented immigrants. He termed the issue as a matter of urgency and not an option.
Maximizing Options
Trump has always emphasized on the need to have many options when entering into any negotiation as it gives him more leverage. The deal might not always work and a negotiator needs to anticipate such outcomes. The options might include renegotiating the terms or walking out. There are many instances where Trump has had to walk out of a deal or concede some of the terms (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). He asserts that as a negotiator, one needs not to be too attached to a certain deal. Having option Band C also known as Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) gives a negotiator more power and leverage in deal-making. BATNA means a well-articulated plan that a negotiator is willing to implement if the deal does not mature (Sebenius, 2017). The counterpart being aware of those options will have to give in to much of the demands to avoid losing out. When negotiating trade deals as the president, Trump plays that card too well ensuring other countries give in to much of his demands.
Escalation
Trump’s distributive approach to negotiation has made him play the role of a bad guy many times. He escalates the fight further and further until his demands are met. His abrasive and tough nature has made him rarely back off from negotiation but to fight hard until he fulfills his objective. This approach will likely give two outcomes, make the counterpart quit negotiation or lower the bar (Braswell, 2015). By likening negotiations to the game of chess, Trump doesn’t accept defeat by the first blow but pushes on until he achieves his goal.
Criticism of Trump’s Style of Negotiation
The zero-game tactics do not always guarantee success as Trump and his supporters would want to portray. The negotiation experts in disapproving Trump style of striking the deal have pointed the following reasons which they believe he and his supporters need to be keen on;
Their loss does not guarantee one’s gain
Trump fails to understand the importance of the win-win situation in any negotiation. His style of zero-sum game has the potential of making him lose a lucrative deal if the counterpart fails to cede ground (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). This might explain why some of his businesses failed as the obsession of having an absolute win might make one jump into a deal without checking its viability. A good example of such enterprises includes the Trump Taj Mahal and Trump Airlines (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). The two businesses never produced any success and their continuous loss-making drove him to file for bankruptcy in the 90s. His call to impose drastic measures against other countries might mean escalating the situation thus serving no purpose in achieving the ultimate goal. Some of the restrictive measures he has advocated against imports from other countries like China and the European Union might, in turn, hurt the American exports to those countries.
Preconditions and warnings do not always work
No matter one's conviction about the usefulness of issuing demands before engagement, such preconditions in most cases increase the tension and may lead to the counterpart bolting from negotiations. Those preconditions and threats may also disrupt one from looking at the details of the deal. During the Republican presidential debate on Fox News, he demanded the removal of Megyn Kelly from moderating as a precondition for his participation. The channel executives stood their ground resulting in Trump missing the following debate. This may have greatly contributed to his loss to Ted Cruz in the Iowa primaries (Kapoutsis & Volkema, 2019). This might be one of the mistakes that Trump may have to learn about setting high demands without looking at the effects. As it may be reasonable to set ultimatums before striking a deal, they must be considerate to both parties in negotiations.
In negotiations, implementable rather than amazing deal matters
Some of the major policies Trump has advocated in his business and political life have faced some hurdles in their implementation. In his zero-sum style of negotiation and failure to give room to the counterpart, he has failed to strike major deals that might have been fruitful to both parties. Setting the bars too high might look amazing to the negotiator but in reality, it might pose a challenge in implementation. In replacing Obamacare, he taunted his health system as the best deal but faced opposition in the Congress and the Senate for the little benefits Americans gain from it. In the international political arena, he has drawn a lot of controversies while engaging with other countries (Whitehouse, 2017). While negotiating for international trade deals like NAFTA, Trump has presented demands that the other parties saw hard to commit to thus failing to reach an amicable solution.
Need to save face for the opponent
Trump's combative style of negotiation means, trying to gain the biggest advantage while leaving too little for the counterpart to reap from the deal (Trump & Schwartz, 2009). Even the most attractive offers may be rejected if accepting them will result in face loss to the counterpart. This should not be the case in any deal and the negotiators need to look at what each party gets from the negotiation. Trump has always advocated for measures that promise to reap the absolute benefit to his side without considering the implication on the other party (Crump, 2019). Failure to understanding the importance of face-saving the counterpart has led to Trump failing to strike major deals with some countries. He promised to undertake the building of a wall on the Southern border with Mexico funding the whole project. This was rejected by the Mexican leaders leading to Trump warn of more escalation of the matter. The Mexican side could not sell the idea as a victory thus refusing to commit to that deal.
There are various benefits Trump has been able to reap while employing his unique style of negotiation. By moving fast in decision making, trying to gain leverage over the counterpart, being an enthusiast about something and being a high baller has helped Trump acquire properties at a way lower than what his competitors would have gotten. Other negotiation skills that he possesses include the ability to know his audience, being tough, marking his territory and maximizing options. His persona as aggressive and tough has enabled him to gain an upper edge in most deals especially when the counterparts fail to match his energy. Identifying his market has enabled him to know the demands to present in any negotiation. He has also used these characteristics to penetrate the political world and appeal to a section of the populace despite having no experience in public service. To gain success in this field, he has employed many of his negotiation tactics. However, those tactics did not usually produce positive outcomes. Many critics have poked holes at his style and pointing out what Trump has failed to understand in negotiation. Helping save the face of the counterpart, not concentrating on the loss of the counterpart and looking at the possibility of implementation are some of the factors that can lead to a better deal making. Generally, Trump's unique style of negotiation has brought him attractive deals while losing some, both as a businessman and a president.
References
Braswell, S. (2015). Trump: The Art of the Campaign. Ozy .
Capehart, K. W. (2015). Hyman Minsky’s interpretation of Donald Trump. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics . https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2015.1075358
Crump, L. (2019). Trump on Trade. Negotiation Journal . https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12250
Dreher, R. (2016). Trump: Tribune Of Poor White People. The American Conservative .
Kapoutsis, I., & Volkema, R. (2019). Hard-Core Toughie: Donald Trump’s Negotiations for the United States Presidency. Negotiation Journal . https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12263
Kogan, E. B. (2019). Art of the Power Deal: The Four Negotiation Roles of Donald J. Trump. Negotiation Journal . https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12265
Kupfer Schneider, A. (2019). Negotiating from the Bully Pulpit: Teaching Trump, Tactics, and Turmoil. Negotiation Journal . https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12280
Richard Shell, G. (2019). Transactional Man: Teaching Negotiation Strategy in the Age of Trump. Negotiation Journal . https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12282
Sebenius, J. K. (2017). BATNA s in Negotiation: Common Errors and Three Kinds of “No”. Negotiation Journal , 33 (2), 89-99.
Trump, D. J., & Schwartz, T. (2009). Trump: The art of the deal . Ballantine Books.
Whitehouse, S. (2017). Business must lobby Congress in order to get action on climate change. The Hill VO - 24 .
