Deception is a common occurrence in negotiations and while previous research suggests that experienced executives and negotiators prefer passive acts of deception (omission, prevarication, vagueness) most research has focused on the active variant (commission).
This study aims to add further understanding to the scarcely available information on passive acts of deception during negotiations. For this purpose, examples of deceptive behaviour occurring in real life negotiation were collected and incorporated into a scenario that formed the basis for a simulated negotiation challenge in which 26 senior executive of a large multinational corporation participated. Each participant had been incentivized to use a pretext to attempt to obtain information from his/her counterpart in three specific areas. While the scenario gave the participants room for a free determination of truthful or deceptive answers it also established ground truth. The most prevalent feature that was observed in this study was avoidance in various forms. Other strategies included the use of truthful statements to hide deception, acts of commission and acts of omission. At the same time, it became apparent that the participants were conscious of each other’s ‘face’ and applied impression management strategies to avoid face-loss of their counterparts.
The results of this study indicate that avoidance was the main strategy applied by experienced negotiators when attempting to omit crucial information.
This brings the current definition of acts of omission into question.
Should it be broadened so as to include avoidance strategies that serve the purpose of omitting information?
Should we reconsider what we think omission really is?