Is unethical to lie during Negotiations - Essay Example

Is It Unethical To Lie During Negotiations Table of Contents When are Deception, Evasiveness or Collusion out of Bounds? 3 2.Can Such Tactics Be Legal and Still Be Unethical? 33.Is It Naive to Be Completely Honest and Bare Your Soul During Negotiations? 44.Are the Rules of Negotiations Unique? Is Any Tactic that Will Improve Your Chance of Winning Acceptable? 4Bibliography 61. When are Deception, Evasiveness or Collusion out of Bounds?Deception is referred as the act to convince a person to believe what is not true or genuine.

Similarly, evasiveness is often described as giving intellectual or ambiguous description of a fact to the concerned party or parties so as to escape from revealing the truth. Collusion is indicted to the act of revealing secrets to someone who is not the concerned party and can misuse the information collected. In few instances, people may be observed as too anxious and desperate to win the negotiation and thus become resistant to their ethical liabilities. It is in this situation that deception, evasiveness or collusion is out of bounds. 2. Can Such Tactics Be Legal and Still Be Unethical?

Considering the legal clauses and ethical considerations, there are many aspects that can be termed to be unethical but legal. For instance, if a broker states the history of a property only revealing its net worth, location and future value, and avoid describing the legal charges associated with the asset because the concerned party did not ask about it, it can be termed as unethical. However, this can be justified on the legal grounds. Therefore, in a few instances, such tactics can be legal as well as can be unethical, depending on the merit of the case and intentions. 3. Is It Naive to Be Completely Honest and Bare Your Soul During Negotiations?

Being completely honest during negotiation, even after knowing the fact that it can earn lesser than what is expected, can never be naive. Revealing the entire truth during negotiation can often result in the cancellation of the deal with higher return. Despite such risk if a negotiator is revealing the entire truth being honest, it must be highly appreciated and respected. However, if the negotiator in this context expects that even after revealing the truth he will earn the deal without losing any bid, the act can be termed as naive.

It is because in this case the negotiator is unable to forecast the risks associated with the ethical representation of the facts expecting irrational return. Considering these facts, I personally think that being completely honest while negotiating can be naive by no means when the associated risks are considered significantly. But, if due consideration is not provided to the risks associated with the decision of being completely honest; it can be stated as a naive act. 4. Are the Rules of Negotiations Unique?

Is Any Tactic that Will Improve Your Chance of Winning Acceptable?In terms of legal code of conduct, the rule of negotiation can be stated as unique to an extent. But based on the ethical ground, the rules associated with negotiation are not quite unique. Lying during negotiations has frequently been identified in many instances which eradicates the chance to signify the practice as unique. It is of no doubt that dealing with concerned parties during negotiation has often been termed as a tactful job.

However, with concern to negotiating actions, I do not agree that any tactful measure, which is unethical even if it is justifiable legally, can be accepted. According to my perception, if an act is perceived to harm the interest of either party engaged in negotiation, it is unacceptable. Therefore, tactics can certainly increase my chance to win but I do not think it will ethically be acceptable.BibliographyRobbins, Stephen P. Organizational Behavior, 13/E Pearson Education India, 2009.