The trap of one-sided concessions – why giving without taking destroys your position in negotiations
Many leaders believe that "concessions build trust." That if they make the first move, the other side will appreciate the gesture and respond in kind.
The problem? It doesn't work that way in negotiations.
Unilateral concessions – giving something without expecting anything in return – do not build trust. They build the expectation that you will give more.
Why unilateral concessions weaken a leader
You change the rules of the game
If you give something away "for free" once, the other side will quickly consider it the new norm, not a gesture.You lower the value of what you offer
What you don't take anything in return for automatically loses its significance in the eyes of your partner.You give up influence
Negotiation is a process of exchange. If you don't expect anything in return, you stop negotiating—you start fulfilling someone else's expectations.
Why leaders fall into this trap
The need to maintain a good atmosphere – "I don't want them to think I'm tough."
Fear of conflict – "if I don't give in, the conversation will stop."
The desire to be perceived as "fair" – "I'll show that I'm playing fair, and they'll reciprocate."
The paradox is that the other side often perceives such moves not as fair play, but as a signal that they can push harder.
How to turn concession into a tool of influence
The key is conditional concession.
Not "I'm conceding because I want to." I concede if I get something in return that is important to me.
Examples:
"We can shorten the delivery time if we receive a prepayment."
"We are willing to lower the price if the contract is for a minimum of two years."
"We can increase the scope of services if the other party covers the logistics costs."
This way, each concession strengthens your position rather than weakening it.
Case study: when concessions reduced the value of the contract
The client, the owner of a medium-sized consulting company, was in talks with a large corporate client. Wanting to "build trust," he immediately agreed to a shorter delivery time and additional reports—without conditions.
The result? Instead of gratitude, another expectation arose: a price reduction. The corporate client treated the earlier concessions as a signal that there was still room for more.
It was only through coaching that the client learned to formulate conditional concessions. In subsequent negotiations: "We can increase the scope of the reports if the contract covers at least three branches." – the conversation took a different turn and his position grew stronger.
How to recognize that you are falling into the trap of unilateral concessions
You concede faster than the other party.
After the conversation, you feel unsatisfied – that you "could have gained more."
The other party treats your concessions as a matter of course, not a gesture.
Summary
Concessions are not a problem. Unilateral concessions are the problem.
Every concession must be linked to a condition – otherwise it becomes a loss.
A negotiator who knows how to make concessions consciously not only builds better contracts, but also greater respect.
👉 If you want to learn how to negotiate in such a way that your concessions strengthen rather than weaken your position, see what executive coaching with elements of negotiation looks like:
www.szkoleniaznegocjacji.com/executive-coaching
This is not about learning to be tough. It is about learning to consciously manage exchanges so that every decision gives you more influence.
If you are looking for executive coaching in Poland, check our offer::