Negotiation | Consultant & Professor with 30+ years of global experience | Negotiation by Design | Negotiation Institutional Capacity Building | #NegotiationByDesign | Dutiful Advocate to my Clients |

Need to strengthen your negotiation strategy and drive more profitable deals?

As a global negotiation consultant and professor, I help organizations build an Institutional Negotiation Capacity—transforming negotiation into a strategic advantage.

I’ve spent three decades honing my craft—originally sparked by a chance encounter in a negotiation workshop led by Roger Fisher. 

That serendipitous moment ignited my passion for negotiation, and since then I’ve guided executives, entrepreneurs, and leaders at world-renowned institutions like the Kellogg School of Management, McGill University, and Columbia University’s ICCCR.

At Negotiation by Design®, we go beyond surface-level tactics. We embed negotiation into your organizational DNA, cultivating a shared language, continuous learning, and long-term strategic advantage. 

Fluent in Spanish, English, and French, and backed by degrees from Columbia University, DePauw University, and an EMBA from Kellogg, I bring a nuanced global perspective to every client engagement.

My personal life—parenting Mateo and Anabel, exploring trails on my mountain bike, and cooking up a storm—has taught me that the best lessons often arise from unexpected moments. These experiences remind me that true negotiation mastery combines skill, humility, and a human touch.

Together, let’s transform how your organization negotiates—unlocking better deals, stronger relationships, and sustainable results.

Ready to unlock your team’s full potential? 

Click “Connect” or “Message” me now, and let’s explore how I can support you.

Or book a meeting at  https://calendly.com/negotiationbydesign

Pablo Restrepo

You never know which small detail will unlock a negotiation.

Years ago, I helped negotiate a merger.
It was between two security companies.
Both provided alarm monitoring.

I focused on the process.
I invited the owner of the other company to dinner.
It was an Italian restaurant.
We shared Italian wine and conversation.

We talked about many things.
Then we shared our passions.
His was playing tennis.
Mine was MTB.

He told me his kids were great tennis players.
He said they could get a scholarship.
However, that would be easier in the USA.
Not in Colombia.

At the time, it seemed unimportant.
It mostly helped build trust.

It took two months to agree on the main conditions.
Then we got stuck on the CEO of the merged company.
Obviously, he wanted the role for himself.
But my client wanted to choose the CEO.

That is when I remembered "that" dinner.
Our strategic plan included opening an operation in Miami.
So the solution became obvious.

We offered him to lead the operation in Miami.
He could move there.
It fit his ambition for his kids.
They could play tennis at school.
And pursue a sports scholarship.

This shows something important.
You do not know what information helps...
... until it becomes useful.

What unexpected detail has helped you unlock a negotiation? 

I'd love it if you share a quick example in the comments.

undefined undefined

Helping Individuals, Organizations and Governments in Negotiation | 30 + years of Global Experience | Speaker, Consultant, and Professor | Proud Father | Founder of Negotiation by Design |

Is your negotiation style holding you back?

We all have a default setting at the bargaining table.

But research into social motives, our innate preferences for outcome distribution, suggests one thing:
Relying on a single natural inclination is a strategic liability.

Mastering deals requires shifting between four distinct archetypes.

• The Individualist: 
Primarily focused on maximizing personal gain.
They are forceful and claim value, rather than creating it.

• The Cooperator: 
Driven by mutual results.
They utilize information exchange to grow the pie for all parties.

• The Competitive: 
Motivated by the gap between their outcome and yours.
This win-big mentality often blocks collaborative breakthroughs.

• The Altruist: 
Prioritizes the counterpart’s success.
While noble, it is rare and often risky in professional settings or in high-stakes negotiations.

The real skill is knowing when to switch.
If you start with cooperation, you often find better solutions and higher satisfaction.
But claiming your fair share? That's non-negotiable.

Elite negotiators don't stick to one style.
They see styles as tools, used situationally.
They build value first, then pivot to secure their fair share.

Which style is your default, and when has it failed you?
Let’s discuss in the comments.

Trust doesn’t “happen” in negotiations.

It’s built on purpose, or you leave value on the table.

The Program on Negotiation at Harvard shows this clearly.

Without trust, negotiators play defense.
- They hide information.
- They limit concessions.
- They accept smaller deals.
- No trust means “safe” agreements.

With trust, they take smart risks.
- They share information
- They create value.
- Trust makes better agreements possible.

If you need to build trust fast, here are 6 moves that consistently work:
	
• Speak their "language".
Learn their terms, norms, and unspoken rules before you walk in.
	
• Borrow credibility.
Use trusted references, proof of execution, and a visible track record.
	
• Name mutual dependence.
Make it clear what both sides lose if talks fail, without threatening.

• Give a low-risk first concession.
Something cheap for you, meaningful for them, no immediate payback required.

• Label what you gave.
Don’t assume they noticed.
Say what it cost you and why you did it.

• Explain the “why” behind demands.
Constraints ≠ greed.
Context preserves trust.

My go-to line when I need trust quickly:
“Here’s the constraint I can’t change, and where I can be flexible.”

Is there another move you use to build trust fast in negotiations, and why does it work?
Share in the comments; I'd love to learn from your experience.

Six Trust Booster in Negotiation to Better Deals

In negotiation, your “honesty” is often just your ego wanting a microphone.

Most professional and personal damage doesn’t stem from deep-seated betrayal. 

It happens because of impulse. 

It happens the moment your mouth starts warming up, and your brain whispers: “Teach them a lesson.” 

The truth is usually accurate, but it isn’t always useful. 

True influence isn’t about winning a moment. It’s about mastering these 10 tactical pillars. They transform high-stakes conflict into high-value collaboration.

1. Listen to learn: 
Active listening is the most effective strategy. It reduces defensiveness. 
Ask questions to uncover core concerns. 
Repeat back what you heard. 
Confirm understanding before presenting your own view.

2. Multiply the issues: 
Avoid fixating on a single point. 
Price and deadlines are common traps. 
Introduce multiple variables. 
Create room for smart trade-offs. 
Satisfy all parties.

3. Sit on the same side: 
Frame the dispute as a shared puzzle. 
Shift the dynamic from “me vs. you” to “us vs. the problem”. 
Find better solutions.

4. Label the power play: 
When faced with manipulative behavior, calmly describe it out loud. 
Naming the tactic neutralizes its power. 
Refocus the conversation on the technical solution.

5. Acknowledge the sacred: 
Do not attempt to use “logic” against someone’s core values. 
Validate their deeply held beliefs. 
Do it without necessarily conceding your position. 
Keep the door open.

6. Defang the threat: 
Treat an ultimatum as a temporary lapse in judgment. 
It can also be a cry for help. 
Ignore it once. 
Allow the other party to retreat without losing face.

7. Pivot to the objective: 
When emotions spike, introduce neutral data and facts. 
Objective criteria act as gravity. 
They pull an emotional argument back to solid ground.

8. Find the north star: 
Identify the overarching goals both parties share. 
Think project success or long-term peace. 
Work backward from that shared destination.

9. Sell the gain: 
Reframe your solution to emphasize relationship capital. 
Emphasize what is being gained. 
Do not focus on what is being “given up”.

10. Maintain agility: 
A rigid negotiator is a brittle one. 
Treat your strategy as a flexible draft. 
Adjust your tactics as you learn more. 
Focus on the other side’s true interests.

The next time you are “technically correct” and ready to fire back, pause.

Ask yourself: “Am I trying to advance the conversation, or just win the moment?” 

The answer is the difference between a signed deal and a total disaster.

The best gift you can give your Valentine today isn't a box of chocolates. 🍫 

It’s a simple question: "How do you need me to show up right now?" 

In a world of constant pings and notifications, our presence is the rarest currency we have. 
But presence without direction can sometimes miss the mark. 

Next time your partner (or even a teammate) shares a challenge, don't guess. Ask if they need: 

👂HEAR: They just need a safe space to vent. No solutions, no "I told you so," just active listening and validation.  

🤗 HUG: They don't need words at all. They need physical or emotional comfort and the feeling of being supported.  

🆘 HELP: They are looking for a brainstorm partner, a strategy, or a literal hand to solve the problem. 

Why this works: 
  - It eliminates "support friction." 
  - It honors their specific needs over your instinct to "fix." 
  - It turns a standard conversation into a moment of true connection. 

The "full presence" we always talk about in negotiation starts at home. Today, give the gift of being truly seen and heard. 

Happy Valentine’s Day to those celebrating! ❤️ 

How do you prefer to be supported when you're stressed? Let’s hear it in the comments. 👇

When you get a “no” in negotiation, stop persuading...

... and start diagnosing.

Because most negotiators hear "no" and think:
“Let me explain better.”
“Let me convince harder.”
“Let me add pressure.”

That’s not negotiation.
That’s panic with vocabulary.

A “no” is data.
And it usually belongs to one of these 3 buckets:
	

1. Misalignment
They’re saying "no" because you’re missing something fundamental.

A) You’re not meeting their interests/priorities.
Ask: “What’s your #1 priority here?”

B) You’re violating their fairness beliefs.
Ask: “When you say ‘fair’, what standard are you using?”

C) They don’t trust you (intent or delivery).
Ask: “What would make this feel safe to say yes to?”
	

2. Constraints
They’re saying "no" because the system around them blocks a "yes".

A) Real restrictions (budget, policy, timing).
Ask: “What’s truly non-negotiable vs just default?”

B) Better BATNA.
Ask: “If we disappeared, what would you do instead?”

C) Wrong stakeholders.
Ask: “Who can say yes, and who can kill this?”
	

3. Tactics
They’re saying "no" because they’re playing a game.

A) Bluffing.
Say: “Help me understand what makes that final.”

B) Win-lose mindset.
Say: “I don’t trade concessions. I trade value.”

C) Predators/hardball.
Say: “We proceed only with a clear process + everything in writing.”


Your job after a “no” isn’t to be more persuasive.
It’s to be more precise.

Because persuasion without diagnosis is just noise with confidence.

Which “no” do you face most often: misalignment, constraints, or tactics?

Ever feel like you’re losing a negotiation before it even starts?

It usually happens the moment the other side drops a number.
In negotiation theory, this is the Anchoring Effect.
It is the psychological tendency to fixate on the first number mentioned.
Even when it is completely unrealistic.

If you’re buying a home, the seller may list it at $900k.
The market may say $820k.
That $900k becomes the anchor.
If you don’t cut the chain immediately, it pulls every move you make.
It pulls you toward their overpriced starting point.

Here is how to defuse a heavy anchor without “protesting too much”:
	
1. Call it out (the direct defuse)
Never throw your counteroffer over the fence.
Invalidate their number first.

Say: “I’m not trying to play games, but we are miles apart on price. That starting point isn’t feasible based on current comps.”
	
2. Don’t linger on their number.
A common mistake is spending 20 minutes explaining why their price is wrong.
That obsession validates the anchor.
Mention it’s non-viable.
Then pivot immediately to your proposal.
	
3. Use the Midpoint Rule.
A strong predictor of the final deal is the midpoint between the first semi-reasonable offer and the counteroffer.

If they anchor high, counter strategically low.
Pull the midpoint back into your ZOPA (Zone of Possible Agreement)
	
4. Justify with “third-party” constraints.
Don’t make it personal.
Use appraisals, inspection reports, or market data.
Explain why your number is the "fair" one.
It’s harder to argue with a bank valuation.
It’s easier to dismiss a personal opinion.

You can’t defend against a tactic you don’t see coming.
Recognize the anchor.
Defuse it clearly.
Set your own baseline.

How easy is it for you to counter a very aggressive first offer?

Ever had a deal collapse because the other side was being “irrational”?

It’s tempting to walk away and blame their ego.

But in 2026, top-tier negotiators know “winning” against a biased counterpart is a myth.

If they can’t see the value, you both lose.

The real power move?

Don’t exploit their bias, neutralize it.

Here are 3 ways to “debias” your counterpart and save the deal:
	
1.	Kill the “fixed-pie” myth
Most people default to believing that for them to win, you must lose.
This “mythical fixed-pie” stops them from exploring tradeoffs.

The fix: Don’t argue over one slice, like price.
- Introduce multiple issues at once: delivery speed, payment terms, exclusivity, etc.
- This forces the brain to shift from “competing” to “problem-solving.”
	
2.	Use “irrationality” to build contingent agreements
If they are overconfident about a future outcome, don’t try to prove them wrong.

Use it.

Example: “Our sales will double by Q4!”

The fix: Propose a “bet” inside the contract.
- “If sales double, we pay X.”
- “If they don’t, we pay Y.”

This bypasses the bias.
Both sides feel they’ve won on their own estimates.

3.	Give them “thinking space.”
Biases like escalation of commitment and egocentrism thrive under pressure.
A forced fast decision often triggers a defensive “No.”
Not a rational choice.

The fix: After a strong proposal, encourage 24 hours to review it.
- Suggest they get an “outsider’s perspective.”
- This lowers the heat.
- It helps their rational “System 2” thinking kick in.

The bottom line: A biased negotiator is an uncreative negotiator.

Your goal isn’t to be the smartest person in the room.

It’s to help the other side be smart enough to say “Yes.”

Which negotiation bias do you find most frustrating to deal with? 
Let’s discuss in the comments.

Three ways to "debias" an irrational negotiator

“We walk the unmistaken path one mistake at a time.”

That’s basically the learning loop in negotiation.

Because in negotiation, you don’t get “good” by reading frameworks.

You get good by running loops:
Prepare → act → observe → adjust → repeat

And yes, your loops will be messy.

You’ll:
	• Anchor too soft and spend the rest of the deal chasing margin.
	• Talk more than you listen and miss the real interest.
	• Accept a “reasonable” offer that’s worse than your BATNA (ouch).
	• Share information too early… or too late.
	• Confuse confidence with certainty.
	• Win the argument and lose the relationship.

None of that means you’re bad at negotiation.

It means you’re negotiating in the real world.

The problem isn’t making mistakes.

The problem is making mistakes with no feedback system.

So here’s the negotiation learning loop I swear by: Keep it simple, keep it brutal.

After every important conversation, debrief with 4 questions:
	• What did I think was happening… that wasn’t? (My story vs reality)
	• What signal did I miss? (Emotion, power, timing, incentives)
	• What did my counterpart learn about me? (And did I want them to?)
	• What’s my one adjustment for next time? (One, not ten)

That last question is the whole game.

Because negotiation mastery isn’t “being right.”

It’s getting better faster.

One loop at a time.
One mistake at a time.
Until the path looks “unmistaken” from the outside.

What’s the most useful negotiation mistake you’ve made, one you’d never repeat now?

Ever faced a corporate giant and felt your leverage vanish?

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: size isn’t power in negotiation. Alternatives are.

Your BATNA is your backbone, and their BATNA is often far weaker than they want you to believe.

Take my client, "PackCo" (name changed to protect confidentiality). They supply plastic bottles to PepsiCo.

One day, an email hits the inbox:

“We’re rolling out a 5% cost-reduction program. Please revise pricing accordingly.”

Inside PackCo, panic. 

PepsiCo represented 90% of the plant’s volume. A 5% cut would wipe out EBITDA. Losing the account could shut the factory. 

The team felt trapped, because they only stared at their downside.

Then we asked one question that changed everything:
What can they do if they can’t reach an agreement with you?

In my article below, I tell the rest of the story, and I break down four practical moves backed by Harvard’s Program on Negotiation: 

- Mapping dual BATNAs
- Reality-testing theirs
- Upgrading and signaling your BATNA
- Counter-anchoring with value instead of price

Next time a Goliath emails first, don't negotiate from a place of fear.

Negotiate from your alternatives.

Because if you don't, they always win.

Ever stared up at a corporate “giant” and felt your knees wobble? Relax: bulk doesn’t buy bargaining power; alternatives do. If the other side can’t w

In Negotiations, Size Doesn’t Equal Power. Your BATNA Does

Better metrics do more than track a deal... 

... they build the negotiator.

If you aren’t measuring the right variables in negotiation, you aren’t truly improving; you’re just repeating the same habits with different counterparts.

High-level skill acquisition requires a learning loop, as Professor Leigh Thompson suggests.

Without metrics, your post-game review is an anecdote.

With them, it becomes institutional capability.

Use these three pillars to sharpen your edge:
	
1. Substantive metrics (the “What”)
  • Analyze ex post: Measure final price, volume, and terms.
   • The optimization: Measure against your aspiration point, not just your “walk-away” price.

2. Relationship metrics (the “Who”)
  • During the deal: Is there enough trust for high-level information sharing?
  • After the deal: Is the bond strong enough to ensure smooth implementation?
  • A “win” that leaves resentment is a long-term liability, not a victory.

3. Process metrics (the “How”)
  • Real-time indicators: Are you anchoring effectively and asking open-ended questions?
  • The benefit: Process metrics allow you to pivot during the session, preventing suboptimal agreements.

When you track the Process and Relationship alongside Substance, you transform negotiation from a “soft skill” into hard institutional muscle.

Stop settling for outcomes you can’t explain. Start measuring what you can control.

When you review a negotiation, do you measure these three metrics, only two of them, or just the substantive outcome? Let me know in the comments

The Smart Negotiator's Scorecard

Aurora Partners K.K.

As a proven global business development executive my focus is on result driven transactions combining the right expertise and strategies to meet customers’ needs.

From a foreigner’s lens, Japan seems like a difficult market to enter. Indeed, several good companies have underperformed or had to withdraw. Japanese companies on the other hand face the challenges of globalization as overreliance on the domestic market is not an option anymore. Over the years, I have learnt that short-cuts can however be made and misunderstandings straightened out, if you work with the right the partner.

My direct mission is to provide value to companies by removing barriers, thinking out of the box and manage communication for more profitable partnering. 

I do this by taking a global approach in working with both Foreign and Japanese companies, across different life science and health care fields to stay ahead of trends. A robust platform forms the foundation while drawing on industry’s strongest expertise, to provide a menu of regulatory, clinical, business development, M&A, funding and market research services.

Managing Director

Quintiles Transnational Japan K.K.

Business development role focused on assisting foreign companies to enter and expand in the Japanese pharmaceutical market through regulatory consultations and clinical development support. Also responsible for accounts of select pharmaceutical companies in Japan to generate sales of clinical studies and functional services.

The tasks include:
- Handling all aspects of sales cycle incl. contract negotiations as well as overall relationship management.
- Project Manager for Japan portion of a large Asian ph III oncology study
- Responsible for coordinating sales effort of new center of excellence for functional services focused on Data Management and Pharmacovigilance.
- Responsible for sales of Central Laboratory services in Japan

Associate Director, Global Sales, Global Customer Management

Manager, Global Sales, Global Customer Management

Invest Sweden (Embassy of Sweden, Tokyo)

Business development and marketing role to attract foreign direct investments to Sweden from the Japanese biopharmaceutical and medtech industry.
- Represented the Japan sales team which also included two senior Japanese staff.
- Account responsible for several, mainly pharmaceutical, companies, matching their R&D interests with Swedish universities’ and biotech companies’ offerings.
- Marketing activities included arranging partnering events in Sweden and Japan, creation of newsletters, and refining the marketing message and product offerings.

Manager, Life Sciences

Project Coordinator

As a proven global business development and marketing executive my focus is on result driven transactions combining the right expertise and strategies to meet customers’ needs.

From a foreigner’s lens, Japan seems like a difficult market to enter. Indeed, several good companies have underperformed or had to withdraw. Japanese companies on the other hand face the challenges of globalization as overreliance on the domestic market is not an option anymore. Over the years, I have learnt that short-cuts can however be made and misunderstandings straightened out, if you work with the right the partner.

My direct mission is to provide value to companies by removing barriers, thinking out of the box and manage communication for more profitable partnering. 

I do this by taking a global approach in working with both Foreign and Japanese companies, across different life science and health care fields to stay ahead of trends. A robust platform forms the foundation while drawing on industry’s strongest expertise, to provide a menu of regulatory, clinical, business development, M&A, funding and market research services.

taplio

The Battle

Pablo Restrepo

Johan Westblad

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScorePablo Restrepo's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Pablo Restrepo

Johan Westblad

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Pablo Restrepo's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScorePablo Restrepo's LinkedIn Performance