"How do I negotiate with someone like Trump?"

While I will soon address tactical approaches, there is a more fundamental question you should consider first: Why do you want to negotiate with such a counterpart in the first place?

Unlike some world leaders who may have no options (even most world leaders have options), most of us have choices. It is worth reflecting carefully on why you would voluntarily enter into negotiations with someone who has shown a pattern of changing positions, reinterpreting agreements after the fact, or viewing negotiations as a competition where only one can win.

The total cost of difficult negotiations

The negotiation phase represents only a small part of the relationship puzzle. Even if you manage to secure what appears to be a favorable agreement, the implementation phase that follows can be extraordinarily challenging with a difficult counterparty. The likelihood of such individuals changing terms, refusing to comply with agreements or deliberately misinterpreting conditions during this phase is substantially higher.

This is exactly where your BATNA (Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement) becomes critically important - not just as a negotiation tool, but as a strategic compass that can indicate that the wisest option might be to move on.

Research consistently shows that most people prefer to enter into a worse deal with someone they trust rather than secure better terms with someone they do not trust. This natural preference is not purely emotional - it reflects the real value of reliability and good faith in business relationships.

Tactical approaches when you have no choice

If you really have no option but to negotiate with this type of counterpart, several adjustments to your approach become necessary:

1. information discipline is of utmost importance. Although I usually advocate information sharing to discover underlying interests, difficult personalities often have limited interest in finding mutual benefit. Be strategic and selective about what you reveal.

2. recognize their negotiation style. These individuals typically view negotiations distributively - as a competition where your loss is their gain. They rarely engage meaningfully in integrative negotiations that address multiple issues and underlying interests to find genuine win-win solutions.

3. Keep it simple. Build in additional 'negotiating margin' beyond what you would normally include, giving you more flexibility to make strategic concessions.

4. create clear incentive structures. implement a balanced approach of incentives and consequences - potential bonuses for compliance but on the condition that the contract also includes penalties for non-performance.

5. documentation is non-negotiable. Make sure everything is expressed with crystal clear clarity in writing. Leave no room for creative interpretation and secure correct signatures on all documents.

To sum up

Even with these tactical adjustments, I encourage you to carefully consider whether continuing with such negotiations truly serves your interests. These interactions tend to be costly both financially and personally, with ripple effects that can affect you in various ways long after the negotiation has ended.

Sometimes the most strategic negotiating move is to realize when not to negotiate at all.

‍