Advanced negotiation: should you set a date for deciding?
In a complex negotiation, requesting more time can support analysis or postpone a difficult trade-off. The managerial question is specific: should you set a decision date when the options are known, but each requires giving something up?
What the literature establishes
Amos Tversky and Eldar Shafir (1992, Psychological Science) show, in choice experiments, that conflict between options can encourage people to defer a decision. Difficulty justifying a preference can therefore lead to waiting rather than choosing. These studies do not directly examine negotiation, but they suggest distinguishing a need for information from difficulty making a trade-off.
Deadlines as a commitment device
Dan Ariely and Klaus Wertenbroch (2002, Psychological Science) show that deadlines can curb procrastination in tasks involving deliverables. Participants accept self-imposed constraints without necessarily choosing the most effective schedule; in the settings studied, some externally imposed deadlines improve performance more. The mechanism concerns the organisation of action, not the quality of a negotiated agreement.
The premature conclusion
One might infer that a deadline accelerates negotiation and improves its outcome. The studies cited do not support that conclusion: deciding sooner means neither protecting your interests better nor securing a more robust agreement. A review date requiring acceptance, rejection or a justified postponement is a more cautious working hypothesis than an obligation to sign. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What these findings cannot settle
These experiments do not reproduce the regulatory, scientific and contractual dependencies of a life sciences negotiation. In Basel, a pharmaceutical project, a Rhine logistics service or an international R&D partnership may legitimately await external approval. Labelling every delay as procrastination would then obscure a real constraint rather than improve the decision.
A practical check in Bâle
Within SHR’s « Négociation avancée » programme, one possible field exercise is to record a review date and the essential information still missing for each negotiation tracked in Basel. On that date, document acceptance, rejection or postponement; every postponement must identify the outstanding item, the person responsible for obtaining it and the next review date. Then calculate the proportion of all postponements for which no new information has been identified as necessary, retaining the review records for verification. This indicator makes postponements open to evidence-based scrutiny; on its own, it does not demonstrate an improvement in the value of agreements. To go further: explore the Advanced Negotiation training in Basel, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Advanced Negotiation in Basel
- advanced negotiation
- Basel
- research
- training basel