In high-stakes negotiations, the way you project power can shape the entire tone of the discussion. This happens predominantly through non-verbal communication – who enters the room first, where they sit, how many people they bring, and even the objects they carry. “Whether we realize it or not, people assess our authority, competence, confidence, and trustworthiness through body language long before we speak,” said Navarro.
He recalled a negotiation from years ago when an insurance company showed up with six lawyers to meet him and one other attorney. “The sheer number of their team created a psychological imbalance,” Navarro said. The move was clearly designed to project dominance. “However, we refused to be overwhelmed. I quietly asked the receptionist to assign us the smallest room available. The effect was immediate: the insurance company’s team could not physically fit in the space, forcing them to reduce their presence to just two
lawyers. In that moment, we subtly neutralized their power play without needing to argue about it.”
Deadlock is often a reflection of a power struggle, regardless of how power is distributed. In the negotiation room, even small physical adjustments can profoundly shift or reinforce power dynamics. “Avoiding eye contact, slouching, shifting uncomfortably, or fidgeting to deal with stress can signal weakness,” Navarro said. The key is awareness – negotiators must be mindful of how they present themselves and how their counterparts are positioning themselves in return.
Influencing power dynamics verbally goes hand in hand with non-verbal cues. “Whoever controls time, controls,” said Navarro. Simple yet powerful actions, such as deciding when each topic is discussed or when breaks are taken, can subtly assert power. “I have seen negotiating teams use this to their advantage by exhausting their opponents with prolonged questioning or delayed responses. These tactics are deliberate ways to manage perceptions of power,” he explained.
“The key is to recognize when previously successful communication methods and strategies start to become ineffective.”
Conflict doesn’t arise out of nowhere; it builds over time. The initial signs include rising tension, mounting pressure, and an urgency to make decisions. Your negotiation partner may demand something you’re unable or unwilling to provide, or vice versa, leading to a deadlock.
“That is where things can become challenging, but also where skilled negotiators can shine,” said Navarro. “In a deadlock situation, both parties have tested each other’s limits, often aggressively, and there comes a point where the focus must shift from dominance to resolution.”
The key is to recognize when previously successful communication methods and strategies start to become ineffective. When emotions run high and the negotiation more closely resembles a power struggle than an effort from both parties to reach an agreement, one of the best ways to break the deadlock is to de-escalate.
“When tension is high, a skilled negotiator will take a step back, literally and figuratively. This does not mean conceding power, but rather signaling a willingness to move forward,” Navarro explained. “A simple shift in posture, such as angling your chair slightly or relaxing your facial expression, can signal a change in approach. Tilting the head or nodding in agreement as someone else speaks subtly communicates openness to dialogue. These are not random gestures; they are cues that the brain interprets as signs of cooperation.”
Verbal strategies also play a crucial role in de-escalation. One essential element is recognizing and rewarding the opponent’s cooperative behavior. This can be done by thanking your negotiation partner for their willingness to collaborate, followed by verbally reinforcing the shared goal you both have.
Nonverbal reinforcement, when used to reward and reciprocate, is just as powerful as verbal affirmation. “If the opposing party begins to relax their stance, it’s important to respond in kind, mirroring their posture, softening your tone, and maintaining a neutral or
pleasant facial expression. This fosters a psychological environment where both sides feel more comfortable moving toward agreement,” Navarro explained.
Trusting someone can feel effortless when the stakes are low.
Trust is one of the main components of successful high-stakes negotiations. Trusting someone can feel effortless when the stakes are low. However, as the stakes rise, so does the complexity of trust. When the potential consequences of betrayal or failure become more significant, the weight of the risk naturally increases to the point where even being perceived as deceptive or inconsistent can break trust in a negotiation. This poses a threat to the entire negotiation process. “Trust is built through consistency and reliability,” Navarro explained.
In some cultures, trust is based on pedigree or reputation, while in others, it is established through demonstrated competence. “Studies have shown that even infants as young as 11 months old can assess trustworthiness based on observed behavior,” said Navarro. “The brain constantly evaluates trust, and it is not enough to simply claim it; it must be demonstrated.”
If trust in a negotiation is broken, he added, the negotiator must find a way to mend the bond and re-establish the relationship. “To rebuild trust, one must acknowledge concerns directly,” he said. “More importantly, actions must reinforce one’s words. This means being transparent, delivering on promises, and consistently demonstrating integrity.”
Backchannel negotiations take place while the main negotiation team focuses on the formal discussions.
If formal negotiations (negotiations at the table) are no longer effective, or both parties fail to break a deadlock or reach an agreement, an additional communication channel is required. These so-called ‘backchannel negotiations’ are informal, off-the-record discussions that occur alongside formal negotiations.
While these conversations are typically not part of the official process, they can influence the outcome by providing additional context, clarification, or strategic shifts that may not be openly communicated during the main discussions. However, effective backchannel negotiation requires a trustworthy relationship from both sides.
“Backchannel negotiations are incredibly effective, and history is full of examples where they have played a crucial role in resolving high-stakes conflicts,” said Navarro. “The Cuban Missile Crisis is a perfect example. While the world watched the formal negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union, a backchannel dialogue between Bobby Kennedy and the Russian Foreign Minister led to a resolution.”
Backchannel negotiations take place while the main negotiation team focuses on the formal discussions. “It can be as simple as a private phone call between two individuals, asking: ‘How do we find a resolution to this?’” explained Navarro.
Another important rule of backchannel negotiations is ensuring that information shared in these discussions is not openly disclosed in the main negotiation but remains off the record. More importantly, understanding how to navigate these conversations effectively is key. “One common agreement reached through the backchannel often revolves around the
question: ‘How do we align our teams on this decision?’” said Navarro. This is the essence of a backchannel agreement – figuring out how to bring a decision to light without exposing the behind-the-scenes discussions that led to it.
Even though backchannel negotiations are a powerful tool, Navarro says, it is equally important to ensure that nothing said or done during formal negotiations creates unnecessary hostility. A “scorched-earth approach,” where relationships are damaged beyond repair, can harm a negotiator’s reputation and make it nearly impossible to re-enter discussions. “One principle I always emphasize is to leave negotiations in a way that makes the other party willing to engage again in the future,” says Navarro. “Even if a negotiation is tough, it should conclude in a manner that both sides can ultimately accept.”
Joe Navarro will deliver a keynote, Breaking the Deadlock: The Power of Nonverbal Communication, and chair a workshop titled Analyzing Your Negotiation Partner at this year’s Negotiation Conference on 23–24 October in Zurich.
Anna Cajot is the International Director at the Schranner Negotiation Institute, where she leads a think tank focused on high-stakes negotiations and high-performance leadership. She provides senior executives with a comprehensive support system, offering access to an exclusive network of the world’s top negotiation experts to help them navigate and lead complex negotiations with confidence and success.
CFOs must drive a financially disciplined way to manage environmental risks amid growing pushback against environmental sustainability efforts, explains IMD’s Karl Schmedders....
IMD's Jim Pulcrano interviews Ruchita Sinha, General Partner of venture capital firm AV8 Ventures, and explores her approach to early-stage investing....
US President Donald Trump's brazen assault on the global trade order will disrupt international capital flows, affecting everything from supply chains to labor mobility. Here's a checklist for reconsidering corporate strategy....
Switzerland should learn from the post-mortem into what drove the collapse of Credit Suisse before rushing to impose further regulation, the Group CEO of UBS said in a wide-ranging discussion on the...
Explore first person business intelligence from top minds curated for a global executive audience