We know a great deal about negotiators’ strategies, the circumstances when they use these strategies, and how these strategies impact their outcomes. Yet, most of our knowledge about negotiation strategies comes from a particular social context: ethically sanctioned negotiations, in which the agreements under consideration are legally and morally acceptable.

What strategies do negotiators use in ethically questionable settings, a markedly different yet ubiquitous social context in which people negotiate the terms of illegal and/or unethical agreements? Dr Gunia examines this issues across four studies, focusing on the well-documented strategy of Q&A.

The studies show that negotiators in ethically questionable settings use Q&A for a different purpose (preventing a negative vs. promoting a positive outcome), under different conditions (distrust vs. trust), and with markedly different outcome implications (competition vs. cooperation). These findings hold potentially important implications for research on negotiation strategy, ethics and negotiation, and antitrust as well as real-world negotiation and law enforcement.

Dr Brian Gunia joined the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School in 2011. He is an Associate Professor in the research track. Brian studies three ways that people commonly jeopardize their careers: by acting unethically, negotiating ineffectively, and sleeping insufficiently. Instead of focusing on self-defeating choices themselves, however, he focuses on simple, theoretically-motivated measures that might enable individuals to act more ethically, negotiate more effectively, and sleep longer or better. Brian is the author of a negotiation blog called Life's Negotiable and a negotiation book called The Bartering Mindset. Brian founded the Johns Hopkins Business in Government (BIG) Initiative, and he currently serves as Academic Program Director for the full-time MBA program.