Trump breaks all the negotiation manuals

The world is being redrawn. And Mar-a-Lago has become the new Versailles where Donald Trump wants to be honored, according to Federico Steinberg, senior analyst at the Elcano Royal Institute think tank. The U.S. president has deployed a style of negotiation that is raising eyebrows among his opponents. It is a model that could serve as a guide for business leaders, who are taking note of the positive and negative lessons that negotiation experts see in Trump’s dealmaking practices.

The first thing that Gustavo Velásquez Betancourt, CEO of CIC Cambridge International Consulting and a Harvard professor, makes clear is that a negotiation, “which many think is about beating your opponent, a paradigm that leads us to be vigilant to avoid being harmed, actually involves mutual collaboration.” The method Velásquez promotes is the one developed by Robert Fisher at Harvard University in 1979, which demonstrates that every negotiation is a process and, as such, always has these elements in common: alternatives or plan B, interests, options, objective criteria, relationships, communication and commitment, to which he would add context, so important these days.

And that is precisely the biggest mistake he attributes to Trump: “Instead of charging like a bull, he should analyze the context, try to understand it, and maintain a working relationship with his opponents.” On the upside, he highlights the president’s proactivity in identifying issues of interest to the United States (such as the trade imbalance) and putting them in the spotlight, “albeit in a threatening manner, which is not advisable in a negotiation since it affects the relationship with the other party,” he adds.

Guido Stein, a professor at IESE Business School, believes Trump is a good negotiator. He has experience making deals in both business and politics. “But his histrionic arrogance and excessive humor don’t help him,” he notes, underscoring that this attitude has harmed him in the public eye. “Even his own people, the Republicans, don’t like him.” In fact, his popularity has declined since he launched the tariff war and the financial markets punished him for it. The latest polls by The New York Times put his disapproval rating at 52%.

Staging

But Trump’s approach has changed, probably due to pressure from the stock market and the public. Stein cites as an example the first meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskiy at the White House, and their second at the Vatican. “There’s a big difference between the two. In the first, [Trump] displayed his arrogant attitude,” he says, and in the second, it’s clear that the American president knows how to negotiate, which implies that for a deal to be struck, both parties must win and the agreement must be better than the one they had previously.

To achieve this, he adds, pressure must be applied, which is what Trump did by putting Zelenskiy on the ropes at the White House. “The use of power is inherent in a negotiation,” he concludes (especially if it is displayed by the president of the United States, who sometimes achieves almost automatic results, Velásquez agrees). “Furthermore, Trump made the Ukrainian leader see his alternatives with clear communication, which is a success,” Stein continues. In his opinion, simplicity of communication and allowing the opponent to “show their mettle” are the two basic and positive ingredients of Trump’s negotiating method that can be applied to businesses.

With the tariffs, the president pounded his fist on the table. And now it is time for dialogue. “The most important lesson a business leader can learn from both trade policy and the war in Ukraine is the importance of strategic planning,” says Pilar Galeote, a negotiation professor at IE Law School: “Meetings need to be prepared before you sit down at the table, both the strategy and the way of communicating.” In her opinion, nonverbal communication, empathy, and emotional control are key. Things that are often lacking in Trump.

Perhaps the anchoring strategy — that is, the initial offers, which should be high but not impossible, Galeote continues — is the downside of Trump’s technique. So far, we’ve seen threats or impositions that have later been delayed or withdrawn after being penalized by the markets, and which has greatly damaged the Trump brand, she explains. “It’s been a game of trial and error. Now we’re getting closer to the real negotiation, and to achieve that, the team is changing.”

China and the EU have done well to slow down and prepare a response strategy, she adds. “We shouldn’t accept just anything, even if doing so entails enormous risks. China has managed its timing well, although I would like to see more than just a number in response to tariffs.” And Europe has improved after its initial weak stance, she notes, and is paving the way for negotiations, as seen in the meeting facilitated by Giorgia Meloni between U.S.: Vice President J.D. Vance and EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen in Rome.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition