Why high-performing negotiators treat concessions not as losses—but as levers for trust, alignment, and value protection.
You made the first move. You were generous. You expected good faith.
Instead—you got silence. Or worse: they asked for more.
This is one of the most common (and costly) moments in negotiation. A well-intentioned concession—offered in the spirit of cooperation—ends up creating imbalance. Not because you gave too much, but because the other side didn’t respond in kind.
Most people give to get. But the best negotiators give to guide.
If you’re in sales, business development, or leadership, you’ve likely been coached to avoid conceding too early. And for good reason: premature or unplanned concessions can cost you margin, power, and credibility.
But research over the last two decades reveals something more nuanced—and more powerful: when done strategically, concessions aren’t signs of weakness. They’re behavioral cues—invitations for reciprocity, trust accelerants, and tools for shaping how the entire deal unfolds.
From classic psychology to modern negotiation science, how you concede, when you concede, and how you frame it doesn’t just influence the outcome—it defines the relationship.
Why Reciprocity Is a Trust Engine
The foundation of smart concession-making lies in one of the most robust psychological norms in human behavior: reciprocity.
Cialdini (1993) defined this as a deeply ingrained social contract—when someone gives, we feel compelled to give back. In negotiation, this norm shows up as a behavioral rhythm: if one party makes a concession, the other feels pressure—psychological, relational, reputational—to respond in kind.
Key finding: When one party concedes, the counterpart often follows suit—unless the first move is ignored or undervalued, in which case trust deteriorates.
The principle underlies the "door-in-the-face" technique: make a larger request first, then concede to a smaller ask—this smaller ask is far more likely to be accepted, because it feels like the counterpart is being given a break.
✅ Practical Tip: Frame Your Concessions as Intentional
Don’t just give—label what you’re giving. Say: “Because you emphasized delivery timeline, I’m willing to move on price.” This activates the norm of reciprocity and pressures the other side—ethically—to reciprocate.
Don’t just give—label what you’re giving.
Example: “Because you emphasized delivery timeline, I’m willing to move on price.” This activates the reciprocity norm and ethically pressures the other side to respond in kind.
If your counterpart makes a move, acknowledge it: “I see you’ve adjusted your volume targets. I’d like to revisit our packaging terms to reflect that.”
This dynamic fosters a collaborative rhythm instead of a power imbalance.
When to Concede First (and Why Early Moves Matter)
Olekalns & Smith (2000) studied how early concession patterns influence the trajectory of negotiation. Their research showed that first-mover patterns (firm vs. cooperative) shape expectations.
A cooperative early move can build trust and invite a similar tone—but it must be structured carefully. An unreciprocated concession early on can signal submissiveness and invite exploitation.
Concessions don’t just shift numbers—they shift perceptions. Your first few moves communicate whether you’re playing for the short-term or seeking long-term alignment.
✅ Practical Tip: Plan Your Concession Pattern
Lead with moderate concessions on lower-priority issues
Reserve high-value issues for later rounds
Use framing to attach relational meaning: “We’re starting by moving on logistics to show we’re committed to making this work.”
This combination of structure + framing activates goodwill without giving away leverage.
How to Avoid Being Exploited When Giving
Concessions are only effective when reciprocity flows both ways. If you give and the other side simply takes, the norm breaks—and so does trust.
Mislin, Campagna & Bottom (2015) explored what happens when concessions are honored versus dishonored post-agreement. They found that honoring your word after a deal is signed strengthens trust and creates goodwill for future negotiations. Conversely, retrading, nibbling, or attempting to claw back value erodes credibility.
Reciprocity isn’t just about negotiation—it’s about reputation.
A one-time concession that leads to ongoing requests or “just one more thing” can breed resentment. This is particularly true in client-vendor relationships or cross-functional internal deals, where expectations are set not just for this deal—but for how you operate as a partner.
✅ Practical Tip: Use “Trust Tests” and Watch for Reciprocity
Give a small, thoughtful concession—then pause.
Watch how the other side responds. Do they give back? Do they acknowledge your move?
If not, tighten up: avoid further unilateral flexibility without clear mutual movement.
After the deal closes:
Honor your word
Consider a post-deal goodwill gesture (e.g., expedited onboarding, an upgrade) These gestures are remembered—and repaid.
Timing Matters: Why Gradual, Tapered Concessions Work Best
Sinaceur et al. (2011) confirmed what many elite negotiators have long practiced: decreasing the size of your concessions over time is a powerful strategy.
This tapering pattern signals to your counterpart that you're reaching your limit—not because you're rigid, but because you're intentional. It communicates that value is diminishing, prompting the other party to settle before they miss the window.
If you concede too much too fast, you reset the baseline—and get asked for more.
✅ Practical Tip: Plan a “Concave” Concession Curve
Start with relatively larger concessions on low-priority issues
Decrease the size of concessions as you go
Avoid making your biggest concession last—it suggests you have more in reserve
This rhythm sets expectations and creates momentum toward closure.
5 Concession Lessons Every Strategic Negotiator Should Master
Taken together, these patterns reveal five core behaviors that separate reactive negotiators from strategic ones.
1. Frame Every Concession to Activate Reciprocity
Ineffective: Concede quickly without explaining what you gave or why
Effective: Clearly label your concession and link it to their request
Takeaway: Framing your concession creates psychological pressure to reciprocate and positions you as intentional, not reactive
“Because you emphasized delivery timeline, I’m willing to move on price.”
2. Sequence Concessions for Impact—Not Convenience
Ineffective: Save your largest concession for the end
Effective: Start with moderate concessions on low-priority issues, then taper down
Takeaway: Tapered concessions signal you’re reaching your limit and increase the urgency to close
Large-to-small is strategic. Small-to-large invites prolonged negotiation.
3. Create Space Between Moves
Ineffective: Make multiple concessions in a row without pause
Effective: Offer, then pause—watch how the other side responds before giving more
Takeaway: Reciprocity only builds when both sides engage; too much giving without response dilutes your influence
4. Close Clean—Don’t Undermine the Agreement
Ineffective: Reopen the deal or add requests post-agreement (“nibbling”)
Effective: Honor your commitments and offer a small goodwill gesture after the close
Takeaway: How you behave after the deal builds (or breaks) long-term trust and your reputation
5. Treat Concessions as Signals, Not Sacrifices
Ineffective: View concessions as transactional giveaways
Effective: Use concessions to shape tone, momentum, and the collaborative frame of the deal
Takeaway: Strategic concessions set the emotional and relational tone—they’re tools of influence, not weakness
From Theory to Impact: How Concessions Build Real Influence
As Robert Cialdini, author of Influence, wrote:
“The rule of reciprocation says we should try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided us.”
This isn’t just a social habit—it’s a strategic trigger. When concessions are framed, timed, and delivered with intention, they build trust and unlock alignment. When they’re given too quickly or without reciprocity, they create imbalance—and sometimes, distrust.
The best negotiators don’t “give to get.” They give to guide. To shape perception. To create clarity amid complexity.
They know that in negotiation—as in leadership—it’s not about who talks the most. It’s about who moves the room.