It seems a good idea to use negotiation tactics which give you a competitive advantage except for the fact of reciprocity, which means the other negotiator will then try the tactics back on you.

We should note, though, that being competitive in the sense of wanting to do well is a positive, not a negative. The negative side surfaces when the negotiator stops being strategic and allows the desire to do well to drift into a desire to ‘do better out of this negotiation than the other party’. This is a polite way of saying ‘we must beat them so that they don't beat us’. It reflects the imagery of negotiation as a sporting contest.

Here are some competitive ‘hard ball’ tactics and some advice on how to handle them (the inference is that good negotiators will not resort to these tactics themselves). Since negotiation is about an issue and involves a process, competitiveness can be found in either dimension.

Competiveness on the issue

Negotiators can adopt a number of competitive issue strategies.

The tough stance negotiator

The other negotiator makes an extreme claim and you get the impression that any concessions will be small and a long time coming.

The essence of the strategy is to wear the other negotiator down and rely on the fact that the clear-cut concession strategy is the most common way of settling differences. By always making smaller concessions the outcome will be in their favour.