Author: Thorsten Hofmann, C4 Institute, Quadriga University Berlin

Negotiations can be a real challenge. Whether it’s negotiating in the business world, in politics, or when buying a car, they are often decided by emotions. This is where emotional intelligence (EI) comes into play.

Our brain is a wonderful thing. But sometimes it leads us down the wrong path in negotiations. The reasons for this are unconscious emotions and perceptual errors to which we can succumb.

What do you do if a negotiation has become only about a price? Haven’t the positions already become completely hardened? Is an analysis even still possible? Is there any room for negotiation?

It is not unusual that threats are part of many negotiations. That we do not know how to deal with them, on the other hand, is rather unusual. How to deal with a threat in a professional manner so that it does not become a menace was already covered in the first part of this article.

“The Roman-German Emperor Frederick II of Staufen (1194 – 1250) once said: “Threatening noise is donkey braying. Nevertheless, threats are part of everyday life in negotiations.

In August, the European Union signed a framework agreement for more than 400 million vaccine doses with the pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca[1]. The drug was then approved by the European Medicines Agency on Jan. 29, 2021[2]. However, a week earlier the manufacturer surprised by announcing a reduction in supply[3]. According to the EU Commission, less than 40 percent of the expected quantity was to arrive in the foreseeable future[4].

The COVID-19 Pandemic has restricted face-to-face meetings and travel. However, negotiations and deal-making are still possible. This is because modern technology supports negotiations — if you follow certain rules.

The European Union is facing enormous challenges in times of Corona. Unfortunately, it is impossible to negotiate with a virus. But what if negotiations between states don‘t work either? Will there be a return of the nation state after Corona, or does the current crisis offer the potential to further advance European integration?

When attempting to achieve better negotiation results, the strategic use of emotions is often the key. In particular, anger, which is displayed in the form of aggressive negotiating, is a favorite method of intimidating one’s negotiating partner and persuading them to make concessions. However, the use of emotions in negotiations should be carefully thought through, as they can easily have the opposite effect. So, does it pay to negotiate aggressively?

The G7 Summit in Biarritz about a week ago again demonstrated the complexity of international negotiations. Especially in times of egocentric negotiators like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, the outcome of international meetings between heads of government, on topics from escalating trade conflicts and a hopeless Brexit to climate protections and the Iran deal, can hardly be predicted in advance. All these are sensitive issues and it is essential to develop global solutions in these fields. It is not only narcissistic heads of government, however, who often complicate their negotiations on the international stage. Generally put, there are many factors to consider in every type of negotiation when the negotiating partners come from different cultural backgrounds.