Trump’s Negotiation Style: A Blend of Competitive and Collaborative Tactics 

For decades, negotiation experts have debated the best strategies for securing favorable deals—should one take a competitive, hardline stance or adopt a collaborative, problem-solving approach?

My favorite competitive and collaborative negotiation books are: 

• Chester L. Karrass’s The Negotiating Game (1970), which outlines competitive negotiation tactics—leveraging power, using pressure, and knowing the true value of things on the table. 

• Roger Fisher and William Ury’s Getting to Yes (1981), which advocates for collaborative negotiation—building relationships, seeking win-win outcomes, and separating people from the problem. 

In our negotiation training, we stress that there is a negotiation continuum, with a very competitive approach at one end and a very collaborative approach at the other.

In life, our most collaborative negotiations should be with our significant others and family, where trust, mutual benefit, and long-term relationships are paramount.

On the other hand, our most competitive negotiations might be in once-off commercial transactions where there is no ongoing relationship with the other party—like buying a car. 

Most negotiations, however, fall somewhere in the middle, where elements of both collaboration and competition come into play. The ability to balance these two approaches strategically can often mean the difference between success and failure in negotiations. 

Donald Trump, as a businessman and later as President of the United States, demonstrates a blend of both approaches, using competitive tactics to apply pressure while occasionally leveraging collaborative strategies when they suit his interests.

His book, The Art of the Deal (1987), provides insight into his negotiation style, which mirrors elements from both Karrass’s and Ury’s frameworks. 

A key element of Trump’s strategy, as described in The Art of the Deal, is “putting many balls in the air”—overloading negotiations with multiple issues to keep the other side uncertain about what truly matters. This tactic, while effective in some cases, contrasts with Karrass’s emphasis on knowing the real value of what is on the table.

By misleading opponents about what is truly important, Trump gains additional leverage in negotiations, forcing the other party to make concessions on issues that may not actually be his priority. 

Additionally, Trump often employs the “good cop, bad cop” strategy, a classic technique outlined in The Negotiating Game. However, unlike a traditional fixed role division, Trump frequently switches between the good cop and bad cop role himself, adding further confusion and unpredictability for the other party.

This strategy makes it difficult for the opposing side to determine who holds real decision-making power, increasing Trump’s leverage. 

At the same time, Trump occasionally uses collaborative strategies that align with Ury’s principles in Getting to Yes. While he often presents himself as a hard-nosed dealmaker, there are moments when he separates people from the problem and seeks win-win solutions that satisfy mutual interests. 

This blog explores how Trump’s negotiation approach—particularly in international trade and diplomatic deals—embodies key principles from both The Negotiating Game and Getting to Yes while reflecting his own personal philosophy outlined in The Art of the Deal. 

Trump’s Use of Competitive Negotiation: The Hardline Approach 

Chester Karrass’s The Negotiating Game defines competitive negotiation as a win-lose game, where one party gains at the expense of the other. Trump frequently employs aggressive, high-pressure tactics that align with this philosophy. 

1. The Extreme Opening Offer (Anchoring) (The Negotiating Game, The Art of the Deal) 

Karrass emphasizes that starting with an extreme demand can shift the final agreement in your favor. This tactic, often referred to as anchoring, works by setting a high or low reference point that influences subsequent negotiations.

Once an extreme offer is anchored, the other party tends to feel satisfied with offers they would have otherwise considered unreasonable. 

Trump frequently employs this strategy both in business and in politics. 

• Example: Renegotiating NAFTA (USMCA Deal)  
  • Trump begins by threatening to completely withdraw from NAFTA, a move designed to create maximum uncertainty for Canada and Mexico. 
  • This extreme opening position anchors the negotiation, making any later demands seem more reasonable in comparison. 
  • By the end of negotiations, Canada and Mexico agree to key U.S. demands, including greater access to their dairy markets and stricter auto manufacturing requirements—concessions they may have rejected under normal circumstances. 

2. Misleading About What Matters: Keeping Many Balls in the Air (The Negotiating Game, The Art of the Deal) 

Trump frequently overloads negotiations with multiple issues, misleading opponents about what is truly important to him. This tactic, described in The Art of the Deal as “keeping many balls in the air”, makes it difficult for the other party to determine what really matters. 

• Example: Trade Negotiations with China  
  • Trump introduces a long list of demands, including tariffs, intellectual property protections, technology transfers, and currency manipulation. 
  • By keeping multiple issues in play, he makes it unclear which ones are deal-breakers, forcing China to make concessions on multiple fronts. 
  • This allows him to claim victories even when the final agreement does not include all of his original demands. 

By misdirecting the other side, Trump leverages uncertainty to extract more value than he might otherwise achieve. 

Trump’s Use of Collaborative Negotiation: Finding the Win-Win 

While Trump uses competitive tactics, he also engages in collaborative strategies that align with Ury’s approach in Getting to Yes. 

1. Trump’s Ukraine Mineral Rights Proposal – Satisfying Interests While Being Hard on the People and the Problem 

The negotiations with Ukraine provide a strong example of Trump employing both competitive and collaborative tactics simultaneously: 

• Collaboratively: Trump proposes granting Ukraine access to Western investment for its mineral rights—a move that would boost Ukraine’s economy and security while also securing U.S. access to key resources and compensation for support during the war. This aligns with Ury’s philosophy of creating value in negotiations rather than treating them as a zero-sum game. 

• Competitively: At the same time, Trump remains hard on the people involved, labeling Zelensky a “dictator” while still pushing for a mutually beneficial outcome. This approach reflects Ury’s definition of a highly competitive negotiator—one who is “hard on the issue AND hard on the people”. 

By combining collaboration in structuring a deal with aggressive rhetoric to apply pressure, Trump employs a hybrid negotiation strategy that keeps the opposing party off balance while still working toward a potential agreement. 

2. Separating People from the Problem – Trump’s Personal Relationship with Kim Jong Un 

• While U.S. policy remained tough on North Korea, Trump personally cultivated a direct relationship with Kim Jong Un, exchanging letters and emphasizing mutual respect. 
• Trump’s ability to maintain dialogue while applying pressure aligns with Ury’s philosophy that negotiations should address issues, not attack people. 

3. Reframing the NATO Debate – Creating Perceived Mutual Benefits 

• Trump reframes the issue by portraying greater defense spending as a way for allies to strengthen their own security. 
• By reframing the issue as a mutually beneficial move, Trump applies Ury’s principles to a traditionally competitive negotiation. 

Conclusion: Trump’s Hybrid Negotiation Style 

Donald Trump’s negotiation tactics incorporate elements from both competitive and collaborative approaches. His unpredictability, role-switching in negotiations, and ability to manipulate priorities make him a formidable negotiator.

For business leaders and procurement professionals, these tactics offer valuable insights into high-stakes negotiation strategies. 

Interested in more blogs, on-demand webinars, and further resources on U.S. Trade Policy?