Would you pay more for a car to avoid the discomfort of negotiating? Research suggests that many people would, and routinely do. A new series of studies led by David Hunsaker, a clinical associate professor of management at the IU Kelley School of Business, Indianapolis, shows that negotiation avoidance is not a rare preference but a widespread behavioural norm. Faced with the prospect of bargaining, many Americans are willing to sacrifice money in exchange for certainty, emotional ease, and the ability to sidestep an interaction they find unpleasant.

Across five large-scale studies, the researchers found that 95 per cent of participants chose not to negotiate at least some of the time, with individuals avoiding negotiation in up to 51 per cent of situations. This finding reframes negotiation avoidance as a default behaviour rather than an exception. Instead of approaching negotiation as an opportunity to gain value, many people see it as stressful, risky, or socially awkward. As a result, they opt out even when the potential benefits are clear and the context makes negotiation acceptable.

The research, published in Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, was conducted with Hong Zhang of Leuphana University and Alice J. Lee of Cornell University. Together, the authors explored not only how often people avoid negotiating, but also what that avoidance costs them and how organisations may respond. Two concepts are central to their analysis: the Threshold for Negotiation Initiation, which reflects how much people need to save before negotiation feels worthwhile, and the Willingness to Pay to Avoid Negotiation, which captures how much extra they are prepared to spend to skip the process entirely.

The idea for the study emerged during a negotiation conference in Israel, when Hunsaker and his colleagues visited a market where bargaining is expected. Despite this, none of them negotiated. The moment raised a simple question: why do people fail to negotiate even when the opportunity is obvious? That question became the foundation of the research. As Hunsaker explains, the real issue is not whether negotiation is available, but whether people are willing to engage when it presents itself.

The findings also help explain why fixed, no-haggle pricing has become such a practical selling point. Even in car buying, a traditionally negotiable setting, many companies now advertise the absence of negotiation as a benefit. The research suggests firms can raise prices by five to eleven per cent under these models, and more than half of consumers will still accept the higher cost to avoid bargaining. Negotiation avoidance, in other words, has clear financial consequences for individuals and clear incentives for businesses.

Another insight from the studies is that people judge the value of negotiating in terms of percentages rather than absolute sums. On average, participants needed savings of between 21 and 36 per cent before negotiation felt worthwhile. Smaller percentage gains were often dismissed, even when the actual amount of money involved was significant. Hunsaker hopes these findings raise awareness. Negotiation aversion is real, he argues, but recognising it is the first step towards overcoming it—particularly at moments when negotiation can shape long-term financial and career outcomes.

More information: David Hunsaker et al, Beyond Propensity: Thresholds, Costs, and Interventions in Negotiation Avoidance, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research. DOI: 10.34891/yv27-1416

Journal information: Negotiation and Conflict Management Research Provided by Indiana University