Truth 30. Responding to temper tantrums

Several negotiators, such as Donald Trump, are renowned for throwing temper tantrums at the bargaining table. Often this means hurling china plates, stalking out, making threats, and using verbal abuse. Is this behavior effective in eliciting concessions from the counterparty?

In a staged study simulation to determine whether it is a good or bad idea to display negative emotion at the bargaining table, negotiators were given a “deteriorating best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA),” meaning that their alternative courses of action were disappearing fast, and the only game that was left in town was to work with Negotiator X.¹⁵ Negotiator X was coached to adopt one of three emotional styles: very cordial and considerate (Ms. Nice), extremely rude and demanding (Ms. Temper), or neither rude nor nice (Ms. Neutral). All the negotiators were then put in a take-it-or-leave-it situation by Negotiator X. The question was which of the three emotional styles would be most effective. It turns out that Ms. Temper was the least effective. Perhaps out of spite or perhaps because they were so angry, no one wanted to give business to Ms. Temper, even when their BATNAs were rapidly deteriorating.

In another investigation, a negotiator made a take-it-or-leave-it offer and in some conditions, made a joke (for example, “I will throw in my pet frog”); the other half of the time, the negotiator did not make a joke.¹⁶ In both these situations, the contents of the offer were the same. However, acceptance rates were not the same. People liked the negotiator with the sense of humor more than the humorless negotiator.

Many temper tantrums are not genuine. Rather, they are carefully orchestrated displays of emotion designed to evoke a response in the counterparty. This is the difference between felt emotion and strategic displays of emotion.

So, what to do? If someone—perhaps even yourself—is throwing a temper tantrum, whether staged or authentic, I suggest using one of more of the following strategies.

First and foremost, take a break. Sometimes people just need a few minutes to reflect and collect themselves. Also, it is a good idea to take a break if you feel you are about to say something you might regret.

Second, normalize emotions. You can do this by saying something like, “This is a significant matter for both of us. It is normal to feel emotional about something this serious....”

Finally, stop talking and start writing—preferably on a flip chart or white board or smart screen. Writing serves several purposes: It is known to be therapeutic; people who are writing are more likely to reflect. It is far more likely that someone might shout “You are a jerk” than to write “You are a jerk” on a whiteboard. Writing creates a point of focus. Finally, when negotiators are stuck, they can summarize points rather than battle about what has been said.