Power is irrelevant in negotiation, only influence is relevant.
The Structural Analysis theory considers structural and economic differences between parties and the resulting power difference as the most important factor affecting success in negotiations. The theories of psychological influence provide a different approach and tactics for success in negotiations. This essay analyses the effect of power and influence in negotiations and proposes that ‘power is irrelevant in negotiation, only influence is relevant’.
This essay concludes that the relative power differences between negotiating parties is not relevant in deciding the outcome of a negotiation. A weaker party could win a negotiation using influence tactics over the other party even if it has more “aggregate power”. One should identify the favorable issues and the BATNA as per principled negotiation strategy and use influence tactics to arrive at a successful outcome. One can exert influence throughout the negotiation by asking the right questions to understand the interests of the other party and convince the perceived value of the suggested outcome for mutual benefit. Along with the strategy of using questions instead of statements, one can use the psychology of influence and achieve results in a negotiation.