Lies and Liars: Why People Lie and How to Deal With It
Written by Linda L. Barkacs & Craig B. Barkacs
In last month’s newsletter “The Downside of Bluffing (a.k.a. Lying),” we discussed six downsides to lying. But why do people lie, especially when the downsides are obvious and often result in serious repercussions? Here are four of the most common reasons people lie when negotiating:
Tactical Lying – Lying can get you a good deal (or help avoid a bad one).
Pathological Lying – Lying is a way of life and everyone lies in negotiation.
Panic Lying – Lying when caught off-guard or not fully prepared (and perhaps feeling rushed to answer).
Careless Lying – Lapsing into sloppy language that undermines your credibility.
In the example presented in our last newsletter, my student “Avery” lied to get a better deal during a class negotiation (reason #1). Some people assume that everyone lies in negotiation (reason #2), which of course says more about those who hold such a view than it does about those they suspect. Some people lie because they are caught off guard (reason #3). This goes back to childhood when what seemed to be the fastest way to avoid blame or shame was to lie: "Did you eat that cupcake?" "No, I didn't!" (While wiping frosting from the lips). Finally, some people lie thoughtlessly because they don’t fully understand the message they’re sending (reason #4).
Let’s stop for a moment and look a bit closer at the foregoing.
Can you get a better deal or avoid a bad one by lying? Absolutely, that’s why people do it. They are tactical liars who covet that short-term advantage, rationalize, say what they think will get them what they want, and assume or hope they won’t get caught. And sometimes they don’t get caught. Like it or not, the world is full of people who have successfully lied their way to some measure of material success.
Are there those who assume everyone lies in a negotiation? Absolutely, this is the belief held by pathological liars, and the utterance is pure projection. They know they lie and assume others are just as dishonest as they are. So, the next time you hear someone say this, understand fully they are confessing that they cannot be trusted.
Little can be done to dissuade those who fall into the first two categories. All we can do is offer a warning to be on guard. And here’s the thing. People often assume others are as they are. So, who gets taken advantage of the most? People who are trustworthy. If you know you can be trusted you’re more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to others and trust them. This makes you an especially vulnerable mark to the #1 and #2 liars above.
But what if you’re not a tactical or pathological liar and a reputation for trustworthiness is something you value. Best intentions notwithstanding, you may from time to time engage in panic or careless lying.
Do we get caught off-guard in negotiations and say things that aren’t necessarily true? Absolutely, no amount of preparation can anticipate everything that may unfold in a negotiation, and under-stress people will often panic and say whatever comes to mind—truthful or not—just to get themselves out of the moment, thus the preceding "Did you eat that cupcake?" example.
So, if you occasionally lapse into panic or careless lying, how might you avoid it? Here’s where taking a moment and considering your words carefully becomes paramount. Framing skills can really make a difference. Let’s get specific and use the well-worn classic negotiation lie of “That’s my bottom line…” when it’s not really your bottom line. This lie is nearly universal and it’s often panic or careless lie. Harsh? Perhaps, and for that reason, it would be unfair to not offer an alternative approach that is more effective, more influential, and avoids branding yourself as a liar. To illustrate, let’s take a look at a typical negotiation conversation:
Negotiator A: As I said previously, we’re willing to pay $45,000 for the product.
Negotiator B: I can lower the price to $50,000—but that’s my bottom line! [NOTE: Let’s say B’s real bottom is $47,000, which makes this a careless and unnecessary lie, as you’ll see.]
Negotiator A: I’m sorry, but $50,000 is not going to work for me. I’ll give you $46,000. [NOTE: Let’s say A could go as high as 48,000, which means there’s an overlap – or positive bargaining zone – of $1,000.]
Negotiator B: I can do $48,000. [Wait! What? Last we heard Negotiator B said $50,000 was their “bottom line.”]
Let’s stop here and take a look at what just happened. Negotiator A has not lied, but Negotiator B has lied—and it’s right out in there in the open for all to see! Although Negotiator B insisted $50,000 was their bottom line, a few moments later they moved to $48,000. Negotiator B might as well get the word “liar” tattooed on their forehead. When the non-lying Negotiator A’s of the world encounter this in a negotiation, they’re liable to think “Oh, no, amateur hour – we’re dealing with someone who says what’s expedient, not what’s true.”
When the Negotiator B’s of the world lie so carelessly, their negotiation counterparts now know that claims of so-called bottom lines are meaningless—a ploy and, yes, a lie. It is now presumed what the Negotiator B’s of the world say is not to be taken seriously. You don’t want that reputation. To avoid this in the future, consider how you could frame this differently:
Negotiator A: As I said previously, we’re willing to pay $45,000 for the product.
Negotiator B: Based on what I’ve heard so far, I’m not prepared to go below $50,000.
Again, let’s stop right here. Look at what framing the response this way has done. It’s just as strong as Negotiator B saying $50,000 is their bottom line in that Negotiator B never has to move off it. But if advancing the negotiation requires lowering their offer, Negotiator B has done two very important things:
Negotiator B has invited a continuing dialogue and may receive an enticement from Negotiator A.
Negotiator B—and this is vitally important—now can move down from $50,000 without branding themself a liar, e.g., Negotiator B can frame their concession this way, “Well, as you heard me say, a while back I was not prepared to go below $50,000. But based on what we’ve discussed since then and what I understand now, I’m prepared to go to $48,000.”
See the difference here? Negotiator B made a statement that is just as powerful as claiming a bottom line (i.e., they can hold fast), but the way it’s framed Negotiator B has invited their negotiation counterpart to sweeten the deal or at least continue the dialogue. If they refuse or can’t sweeten the deal, Negotiator B can always repeat that statement that based on what they’ve heard so far, they are not prepared to move off their prior offer. Negotiator B hasn’t lied, and Negotiator B’s reputation is intact.
There are many ways to avoid lying as well as to ward off lies from others and promote more ethical behavior in negotiations. Sound advance preparation seems obvious, but most negotiators under-prepare. The more you know, the less likely the chance the other party will try to deceive you (or succeed in doing so).
Finally, if at all possible, negotiate in person. There is much research to indicate that negotiating at a distance (through email, text, or Zoom) makes lying easier or seemingly more comfortable for people. Build in ways to verify claims made by agents, who may have financial incentives to stretch the truth. Ask tough questions and then actually listen to the answers you are given. Much can be gleaned through what is not said (lies of omission). Finally, make an explicit commitment to honesty. Your reputation will thank you!