Blogs and Content | RED BEAR Negotiation Company

The 9 Most Common Mistakes Negotiators Make with Informational Power

Written by RED BEAR | Jun 4, 2025 3:00:02 PM

An often underappreciated negotiation lever?

Visibility. 

Visibility into the other party’s situation (internal and external), motivations, and behaviors can arm you with the leverage you need to make better deals. 

The problem? Many professionals either mishandle the information they have or fail to gather what they truly need. The result isn’t just a weaker deal—it’s lost credibility, missed opportunities, and unnecessary concessions.

At RED BEAR, we train negotiators to manage information skillfully. Just as important as learning the right moves is knowing which missteps to avoid. 

Through our work with leading sales and procurement teams across industries, we’ve identified the most common—and costly—mistakes negotiators make when dealing with information.

Let’s get into the specifics—and help your team negotiate smarter, not just harder.

 

 

Key Takeaways

  • Oversharing or withholding information at the wrong time weakens negotiation leverage.
  • Discovery (Stage 2) questions reveal hidden motivations that drive real value.
  • Tough questions require planned, ethical responses to maintain control and trust.
  • Not all information is equal—prioritize what frames value and shapes perception.
  • Strategic use of information enhances both credibility and deal outcomes.

 

Mistake #1: Revealing Too Much Information Too Soon

It’s a common (and often well-intentioned) mistake: you walk into a negotiation, eager to show value, and start sharing everything you know—your capabilities, your roadmaps, your cost structures, even your flexibility. 

But instead of building trust, you give away your leverage.

This kind of information "dumping" is particularly dangerous early in the negotiation process. At that stage, you’re still uncovering the other party’s goals, constraints, and decision-making landscape. By revealing too much too soon, you unintentionally shift the power dynamic in their favor.

RED BEAR trainers see this often in technical environments, where engineers or subject matter experts feel compelled to prove their knowledge. 

For example, we worked with a leading technology company whose engineers eagerly shared their entire product roadmap with a supplier early in a negotiation. The supplier, now armed with future pricing insights and timelines, used that information to drive harder concessions—without offering any additional value in return.

 

Why it happens:

  • Lack of clarity on what information should be shared vs. what must be protected
  • Misunderstanding the negotiation phase—mistaking early collaboration for mutual commitment
  • Overconfidence in the belief that transparency will automatically build goodwill

 

Why it hurts you:

  • You lose control of the negotiation narrative
  • You reduce your ability to use high-value information strategically
  • You train the other party to expect more from you without giving anything in return

How to fix it:

  • Segment your information: Know what to share now, later, and never.
  • Time your disclosures: Hold back details that aren’t required until value has been clearly established. Our Negotiation Planner helps you sequence what to share, when, and why. 
  • Lead with questions, not data: Before offering anything, learn what the other party values most.

Remember: the first to speak isn’t always the most prepared—it’s often the one who walks away with less.

Mistake #2: Withholding Everything—And Killing Trust

If oversharing is risky, the opposite can be just as damaging. 

Negotiators who hold back all information—believing it will keep them in control—often find themselves in stalled discussions, facing suspicion, or completely losing the other party’s engagement.

While it’s essential to protect sensitive data like walkaway points or internal constraints, refusing to share any relevant insights at all sends a clear (and dangerous) message: “I don’t trust you.”

This behavior undermines one of RED BEAR’s core negotiation principles: Manage Information Skillfully. That doesn’t mean guarding information like state secrets. It means planning what to share, when, and why—to shape perception, build credibility, and guide the negotiation toward mutual value.

 

Why it happens:

  • Fear of being taken advantage of
  • Misguided interpretation of “control equals silence”
  • Lack of planning around strategic disclosures

How it hurts you:

  • Prevents relationship-building, especially in collaborative or long-term supplier scenarios
  • Makes your position less believable or persuasive
  • Encourages the other party to mirror your silence—leading to an information stalemate

How to fix it:

  • Share with purpose: Plan 1–2 compelling data points you can offer early to anchor value or show credibility.
  • Match their openness: If the other party shares insight, reciprocate appropriately.
  • Use disclosures to create tension: Share just enough to create interest or curiosity, then pause to see how they respond.

Informational power isn’t about hiding the playbook—it’s about knowing which plays to run, and when. Transparency, when used intentionally, builds trust without giving away the game.

Mistake #3: Not Preparing Answers to Tough Questions

Every experienced negotiator knows this moment: the other side drops a question you didn’t anticipate. 

It might be about pricing flexibility, delivery capabilities, or your internal approval process. 

You pause—unsure whether to answer, deflect, or spin.

When you’re unprepared, you often choose the worst possible response:

  • Oversharing sensitive information to seem cooperative
  • Stammering, which weakens credibility
  • Making vague promises you can’t fulfill
  • Saying “yes” when you should absolutely say “not yet”

This is where RED BEAR’s guidance is clear: anticipate tough questions before the negotiation begins. During our workshops, we ask participants to write down their “hardest likely questions” and then develop responses that are honest, strategic, and ethically sound.

One common scenario involves price pressure. A buyer asks, “How flexible are you on that number?” An unprepared seller might panic and say, “Well, we can talk about it,” which instantly signals negotiability—even if there wasn’t any. 

A better response? “We’ve structured this to reflect the full scope of value we’re offering—can I ask which part you’re comparing it against?”

Why it happens:

  • Lack of planning and rehearsal
  • Underestimating the other party’s probing tactics
  • Mistaking spontaneous responses for strategic improvisation—without a foundation of preparation

Why it hurts you:

  • You lose credibility and appear uncertain or weak
  • You unintentionally reveal leverage or flexibility too early
  • You make verbal commitments that box you into unfavorable terms

How to fix it:

  • Identify your top 3–5 risky questions and build intentional responses
  • Use framing language: “That depends on…” or “What we’ve committed to is…”
  • Avoid misleading—ethical confidence builds long-term trust

Tough questions aren’t traps—they’re tests. And the best negotiators ace them by preparing for them.

Mistake #4: Failing to Ask Enough Discovery Questions

Many negotiators know they should “ask questions,” but too often, they stop at the obvious. They ask about timelines, specs, or volume—but fail to dig deeper into why those things matter. 

This surface-level inquiry limits their ability to build value, influence outcomes, or discover negotiation leverage.

That’s where Discovery (or Stage 2) Questions come in. RED BEAR teaches that top-performing negotiators ask two to three times more questions than average performers—and the most valuable of those are probing, open-ended, and intentional.

Instead of asking, “When do you need this by?” a Discovery Question sounds like:

  • “What happens if the delivery slips by a week?”
  • “Who needs to sign off, and what are their concerns?”
  • “What’s driving that volume target this quarter?”

These questions uncover motivations, risk thresholds, internal politics, and personal incentives. Without them, you’re negotiating based only on what the other party says they want—not what they actually need.

Why it happens:

  • Overconfidence in existing information
  • Lack of training in open-ended questioning
  • A tendency to “pitch” rather than listen

How it hurts you:

  • You miss hidden negotiables
  • You risk anchoring proposals to inaccurate assumptions
  • You forfeit the chance to reframe or expand the deal scope

How to fix it:

  • Script Discovery (Stage 2) Questions into your negotiation planning
  • Use “what” and “why” over “yes/no” structures
  • Test and summarize responses to show you understand—and gain clarity in return

If you’re talking more than you’re asking, you’re negotiating in the dark. Smart questions light the way to smarter outcomes.

Mistake #5: Using Information to Win Points, Not Build Value

In the heat of a negotiation, it’s tempting to treat every fact or data point as a weapon—to “score points,” one-upping the other side with clever rebuttals or undercutting their position with counter-evidence. 

While this might feel like winning, it’s often a fast track to losing the relationship—and the deal.

Informational power used competitively without any collaboration creates tension without direction. Great negotiators don’t just use data to win—they use it to build, frame, and create value.

For example, instead of saying:

“Your price is way above market—this competitor is offering 20% less,”

Consider:

“We’ve seen market rates closer to X. Can we talk about what’s driving your number and explore options that align better with our value expectations?”

This shift from confrontation to collaboration changes the game. It invites solutions, not standoffs.

Why it happens:

  • Focus on proving a point rather than shaping perception
  • Misuse of benchmarking or internal data as blunt-force tools
  • Competitive mindset overrides collaborative (and ultimately creative) opportunities

How it hurts you:

  • Reduces openness from the other party
  • Triggers defensiveness, making agreement harder
  • Diminishes opportunities for creative trades or elegant negotiables

How to fix it:

  • Use framing to shape the conversation, not dominate it
  • Introduce data selectively and strategically—not emotionally
  • Focus on building value for both parties, not just “winning the moment”

The best negotiators know: the goal isn’t to show how much you know. It’s to create an environment where everyone learns what a great deal can look like.

 

Mistake #6: Assuming What the Other Party Knows (or Doesn’t)

One of the most dangerous habits in negotiation? Assuming the other party sees the same landscape you do.

You assume:

  • They know your constraints.
  • They’ve read between the lines.
  • They fully understand your offer—or your value.
  • They don’t know about your competitors, internal timelines, or pricing logic.

Assumptions like these lead to misalignment, missed signals, and ultimately, missed opportunities.

To combat this, it’s important to “test and summarize” throughout the negotiation talks. 

For example, instead of assuming the buyer understood your bundled pricing logic, you might say:

“Just to confirm, are you seeing how the longer term impacts the total cost savings here?”

Or to challenge assumptions on your end:

“What have you already heard about our delivery capabilities—and what concerns do you still have?”

Why it happens:

  • Familiarity bias: assuming your logic is obvious
  • Overconfidence in your narrative
  • Lack of intentional feedback loops in the conversation

How it hurts you:

  • You might miss objections until it’s too late
  • You could under- or over-disclose based on flawed assumptions
  • You fail to correct misunderstandings that derail deals

How to fix it:

  • Summarize often: “So what I’m hearing is...”
  • Ask meta-questions: “How are you interpreting this piece?”
  • Never confuse silence with understanding

In negotiation, the gap between what you know and what they think you know can cost you the deal. Don’t guess—check.

Mistake #7: Revealing Walkaway Points or Internal Constraints

Negotiators are often trained to “be transparent,” but transparency doesn’t mean vulnerability. One of the most damaging (and common) mistakes is revealing your bottom line or internal limitations too early—or at all.

Imagine saying:

  • “That’s our absolute best price.”
  • “We need this closed before quarter end.”
  • “We only have budget approval for X.”

Each of these disclosures, while possibly true, hands significant leverage to the other party. They now know where your flexibility ends. 

This violates the core of informational protection, one of the three critical aspects of managing information skillfully.

The goal isn’t to lie—it’s to withhold selectively, with intent. You can maintain credibility without giving away your negotiating floor.

 

Why it happens:

  • Pressure in the moment
  • An emotional need to appear honest or collaborative
  • Inexperience handling power dynamics

How it hurts you:

  • You shrink your own negotiating range
  • You trigger pressure tactics (e.g., “Well if that’s all you’ve got…”)
  • You remove any ambiguity the other party must work through

How to fix it:

  • Reframe questions about your limits: “We’re focused on finding mutual value—how close are we to your target?”
  • Use timing as a tool: Don’t answer constraint questions until you’ve uncovered what’s on the table
  • Plan your disclosures in advance—and how to redirect or respond credibly

In negotiation, revealing your walkaway point is like showing your hand in poker—and then trying to bluff. Guard it like your margin depends on it—because it does.

Mistake #8: Treating Every Detail as Equally Valuable

In negotiation, not all information carries equal weight. Yet many professionals make the mistake of treating every fact, figure, or talking point as equally important—cluttering the conversation, diluting their message, and undermining their leverage.

This "flat" approach to information fails to recognize that some data points:

  • Shape perception and frame the deal
  • Anchor expectations
  • Create urgency or justify terms
  • Are easily refuted or misinterpreted

RED BEAR’s training stresses the importance of building a framing strategy—focusing on two to three high-impact insights that support your value and negotiating position. 

More isn’t better. 

Better is better.

For example: Instead of listing every product feature or service capability, a skilled seller might focus on one value narrative tied to the customer’s top priority—speed to market, risk reduction, or total cost of ownership. Everything else supports that frame.

 

Why it happens:

  • Over-preparation without prioritization
  • Anxiety that “leaving something out” weakens your case
  • Misunderstanding what creates perceived value

How it hurts you:

  • You overwhelm or confuse the other party
  • You lose control of the negotiation narrative
  • You make it easier for the other side to attack weaker points and ignore your strongest ones

How to fix it:

  • Rank your data by strategic impact—what changes minds, justifies value, or answers their needs?
  • Limit your framing points to two or three max
  • Prepare rebuttals for weaker facts, but don’t lead with them

The best negotiators don’t bring everything to the table. They bring the right things—and know exactly when to play them.

Mistake #9: Forgetting That Information Is Perception Power

In negotiation, power is rarely objective—it’s perceptual. 

And one of the most overlooked truths is this: it’s not just what you know. It’s what the other party thinks you know.

When negotiators appear unprepared, uncertain, or vague, they lose credibility—even if they’re holding strong internal data. 

On the flip side, someone who demonstrates clarity, confidence, and control over information—through smart questions, firm positioning, and strategic framing—immediately earns influence.

The truth is that perception of informational control can shift entire deal dynamics. In both our trainings, participants see firsthand how appearing well-informed leads to fewer concessions and more favorable terms, even if no new facts are introduced.

Why it happens:

  • Confusing substance with style—thinking the facts will “speak for themselves”
  • Underestimating the impact of preparation, rehearsal, and messaging
  • Failing to manage information delivery with intentionality

How it hurts you:

  • You appear reactive instead of proactive
  • The other party assumes you’re less competent or less powerful
  • You give up psychological leverage before the negotiation begins

How to fix it:

  • Speak with confidence—even when saying “I’ll get back to you”
  • Use structure and strategy in how you present information
  • Remember: perception of expertise earns concessions

In negotiation, control the message, and you control the moment. What they think you know can be just as powerful as what you actually do.

Learn the Discipline Behind the Data

Informational power is one of the most underutilized—and most misused—levers in negotiation. 

From saying too much too soon, to holding back at the wrong moment, to simply failing to ask the right questions, even skilled negotiators fall into avoidable traps.

But here’s the good news: every mistake outlined in this article can be prevented. Not with more information, but with better discipline.

The highest-performing procurement and sales teams don’t just collect facts—they manage them with intent. They plan, prioritize, and position insights to shape conversations, not just participate in them. 

That’s what informational power is really about: being strategic with what you know and intentional with how you use it.

“Curious where your team might be leaking power? 

Contact RED BEAR today to explore a custom training program that transforms your team’s approach to information—and strengthens every deal they touch.