Every negotiation is lopsided. One side knows more, has more alternatives, or can afford to wait longer. The rules change during play, and the other party’s next move is rarely the one you planned for.
Most of what we are taught about markets, pricing and bargaining assumes the opposite: many buyers and sellers, identical products, free entry and exit, perfect information. Such models are useful because they simplify, but they do not describe the situation you are in when a supplier changes terms or a new competitor appears.
The same is true of business strategy. The balance between competitors, or between buyers and suppliers, is not fixed. A new technology, a regulation, a disruption in supply or a change in customer behaviour can move advantage from one player to another, sometimes quickly. Those who come out well tend to be the ones who saw the change early, judged what it meant for them, and mobilized the organization to act on it.
This Forvm asks what skills that takes, and which of them classical economics does not teach. How do you detect a shift while it is still small? How do you judge whether it favours you or the other side? How do you turn that judgement into action by people who may not share your view? And when asymmetry works against you, what can you do about it?
Bring a negotiation, a pricing decision or a strategic turning point where the balance was clearly uneven, or where it changed. We will use these cases to build a shared list of the skills involved.e predictable outcome really the rational choice when the upside and downside are radically different?
As always, it’s up to you.