Think twice before using door-in-the-face tactics in repeated negotiation: Effects on negotiated outcomes, trust and perceived ethical behaviour

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the detrimental effects of the door-in-the-face (DITF) tactic in repeated negotiation. A more complete understanding of its negative consequences is essential to make an informed decision about its use.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper is the product of two between-subjects scenario-based negotiation experiments involving university students in Hong Kong (Study 1) and professionals in the UK with negotiation experience (Study 2).

Findings

Both the studies herein showed that detecting opponents using this tactic reduced the degree to which negotiators found their counterparts trustworthy. It also increased the likelihood of negotiators switching to an alternative partner in a collaborative project. This relationship is mediated by perceived trustworthiness. Negotiators who had detected opponents’ use of DITF made higher offers and obtained better outcomes in a subsequent negotiation. These findings indicate that negotiators who benefitted from DITF considered its use ethical, while those who suffered because of its use by others found it unethical.

Practical implications

Before using DITF, users should be wary of the likelihood they and their counterpart will negotiate again and/or will collaborate in a future project.

Originality/value

This paper presents a new perspective from which the use of DITF may backfire in a subsequent negotiation, in terms of both objective and subjective outcomes. This is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the first paper to address how user and victim judge the ethicality of DITF tactics. The findings offer a building block for future research on other compliance techniques in repeated negotiations.

Citation

Wong, R.S. and Howard, S. (2018), "Think twice before using door-in-the-face tactics in repeated negotiation: Effects on negotiated outcomes, trust and perceived ethical behaviour", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 167-188. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-05-2017-0043