Anger in negotiation: a concession is not a sound agreement
When a supplier rejects a deadline or a partner disputes the allocation of resources, showing irritation may seem useful. The management question is precise: does securing a concession through anger mean that you have negotiated better?
What the literature establishes
Gerben A. van Kleef, Carsten K. W. De Dreu and Antony S. R. Manstead (2004, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) showed in experimental negotiations that participants facing a counterpart who expressed anger could concede more than those facing a counterpart who expressed happiness. Their findings support an informational mechanism: anger can suggest higher demands and less room for negotiation. It is therefore not merely an internal state; it can become a signal that the other party uses to adjust their offers.
The decisive role of alternatives
Marwan Sinaceur and Larissa Z. Tiedens (2006, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology) showed that the effect of anger depends in particular on the alternatives available to its recipient. In their experiments, concessions to an angry counterpart occurred primarily when participants had poor alternatives to an agreement. Perceptions of the counterpart's toughness help explain this effect: conceding can reflect constraint rather than endorsement.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that managers should display anger to secure better terms. Yet these findings concern concessions in defined situations, not the overall quality of a business or working relationship. Within SHR's Emotional Intelligence programme, the task is therefore to distinguish the emotion expressed, the other party's interpretation and the outcome actually being sought. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence cannot guarantee
These experiments do not establish that a concession secured under pressure will remain acceptable or be implemented properly. Nor do they provide a rule directly transferable to bilingual exchanges, where wording and conventions of expression can complicate interpretation. Assessing a negotiation solely through movement on price or deadlines therefore overlooks essential dimensions of the agreement.
A practical check in Fribourg
In Fribourg, SHR can offer an exercise inspired by food-sector purchasing, bilingual industry and partnerships with the university hub: negotiating a delivery deadline or access to shared equipment. Using the same scenario, compare an irritated formulation with a firm formulation without anger, keeping demands and alternatives constant, then separately record the concession obtained and each party's written restatement of the agreement. The concrete measure is the proportion of agreements in which both restatements match on the deadline, responsibilities and conditions of implementation. This learning exercise does not replicate a controlled study, but it can check whether an apparent gain is accompanied by shared understanding. To go further: explore the Emotional Intelligence training in Fribourg, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Emotional Intelligence in Fribourg
- emotional intelligence
- Fribourg
- research
- training fribourg