Advanced negotiation: is disclosing a conflict of interest enough?
A negotiation may depend on advice from an intermediary whose remuneration varies with the agreement reached. The managerial question is specific: does disclosing that interest enable the decision-maker to assess the recommendation freely?
What the literature establishes
Daylian M. Cain, George Loewenstein and Don A. Moore (2005, The Journal of Legal Studies) experimentally studied conflict-of-interest disclosure in an advisory relationship. In their setting, disclosure could increase bias in recommendations without recipients sufficiently adjusting their judgement. Making an incentive visible therefore does not amount to neutralising its effect.
The pressure that accompanies transparency
Sunita Sah, George Loewenstein and Daylian M. Cain (2013, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) show that disclosure can reduce trust in advice while increasing willingness to follow it. One mechanism involves interpersonal pressure: refusing may seem to signal that the adviser is considered self-interested or untrustworthy. In negotiation, this suggests distinguishing the formal freedom to refuse from the social ease of exercising that freedom.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that interests are better left undisclosed; these studies do not support that conclusion. Rather, they caution against treating transparency as sufficient protection or as a substitute for applicable obligations. Disclosure needs to be accompanied by the opportunity for independent scrutiny and refusal without personal justification. (our executive and employee training programmes)
The limits of the evidence and of current practice
These experiments concern advisory situations, not the full range of commercial or institutional negotiations. They do not establish the magnitude of these effects in the long-term, regulated or multiparty relationships found in Valais. In practice, keeping a disclosure on file confirms that information was supplied, but not that its recipient had a genuine opportunity to act against the recommendation.
A practical check in Sion
Within SHR’s “Advanced Negotiation” programme, an exercise in Sion could examine a paid recommendation concerning hydropower equipment, healthcare procurement, wine distribution or an Alpine tourism service. For each case reviewed, record the disclosed interest, the availability of an independent assessment and the opportunity to decide without the adviser present. Then measure the proportion of cases with all three elements documented: this indicator checks a procedural safeguard without claiming to demonstrate that the resulting agreement is better. To go further: explore the Advanced Negotiation training in Sion in the canton of Valais, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Advanced Negotiation in Sion
- advanced negotiation
- Sion
- research
- training sion