Written by Marijn Overvest | Reviewed by Sjoerd Goedhart | Fact Checked by Ruud Emonds | Our editorial policy

Negotiation examples are available widely on the internet to help people how to prepare and what approach they can use to close their deals. 

In this article, we will show you some negotiation examples that you can take inspiration from to help you prepare for your next negotiation.

In addition, I have created a free-to-download editable in-negotiation toolkit template. It’s a PowerPoint file that can help you create the best approach when negotiating with other parties. I even created a video where I’ll explain how you can use this template.

Negotiation Experience is the Key

To a professional negotiator or procurement manager, experience is always the best teacher to become a good negotiator. You take those moments of victory and relish it while you hold on to those moments of defeat and you learn from each painful memory. 

I can still vividly remember my first negotiations. With sweaty hands, I entered the negotiation room, and while stuttering, I made my first proposal. It was immediately dismissed by the person across from me, and I didn’t know how to handle it. 

Now, 15 years later, I regularly sit down with CCOs and CEOs of large international companies. I approach the table with a plan and only feel a healthy level of nervousness before a negotiation, but I no longer get intimidated by anyone. That is what experience does to you.

Of course, while experience is just one of the many facets of becoming an expert negotiator, it is easy to learn because the most important negotiations are memorable for everyone involved.

And even if a person is not involved, stories of successful negotiations are now available for people to read thanks to the Internet!

Now, let’s go through the six negotiation examples, one of which is from my personal experience.

6 Real-Life Negotiation ExamplesThat Will Inspire You to Negotiate Better

Here are the 6 examples that I am excited to share for you to be inspired with your next negotiation deal.

1. Deal Termination Between Kraft Foods and Starbucks

Starbucks and Kraft formed a partnership in 1998 to distribute Starbucks packaged coffee in grocery stores. However, as the coffee industry landscape evolved, particularly with the surging popularity of single-serve coffee pods, Starbucks sought greater flexibility to adapt to market trends.

In 2010, Starbucks proposed buying out Kraft’s contract for $750 million to terminate the agreement Kraft objected to the deal termination, Kraft raised objections, but Starbucks proceeded with the termination nonetheless.

Subsequently, Starbucks witnessed significant growth in its share of the single-serving coffee pod market and grocery-store product sales. To resolve their dispute over this contract termination, the two companies resorted to arbitration after failing to settle independently.

In 2013, the three-year dispute between Kraft Foods and Starbucks regarding the distribution of the latter’s packaged coffee in grocery stores reached its conclusion.

In November of 2013, an arbitrator ruled that Starbucks had breached the agreement, ordering the coffee giant to pay Kraft Foods $2.75 billion to settle the dispute.

What can I learn from it?

This business between Starbucks and Kraft Foods demonstrates how the ever-changing dynamics of marketplace trends can render the previously negotiated business agreements unsuitable over time.

A valuable lesson to learn from this dispute is the importance of creating flexible business contracts. In their initial agreement, Kraft and Starbucks might have benefited from including provisions for scheduled renegotiations.

However, Kraft and Starbucks could have made their initial agreement better by adding a plan to review and change the terms as the market changed.

They could have also agreed on what would happen if they wanted to end the deal early, like paying penalties or compensation. In short, being flexible and thinking ahead in contracts is essential when dealing with changing markets.

2. Warner vs CBS

In October 2013, Time Warner Cable faced a significant crisis when it reported an unprecedented quarterly loss of television subscribers, with 306,000 customers out of its 11.7 million-strong base choosing to cancel their subscriptions. This problem was due to its dispute with the television network CBS over programming fees.

This dispute was so bad that Time Warner Cable temporarily stopped showing CBS in some big cities like New York and Los Angeles. In the end, CBS got to be victorious in this dispute. CBS secured a substantial increase in fees for its programming in the affected blackout areas, raising the fee per subscriber from about $1 to $2.

Additionally, CBS gained the digital rights to distribute its content through online platforms like Netflix. Time Warner Cable conceded largely due to its fear of losing a significant portion of its subscriber base if the dispute disrupted the broadcast of Monday night football on CBS.

What can I learn from it?

This dispute highlights that trying to be tough in negotiations, like what Time Warner Cable did, can often make things worse. Instead of helping, it can backfire on you. It’s better to find a solution that works for both sides.

Winning at the other person’s expense usually doesn’t work out well in the long run. Thus, seeking mutually beneficial solutions is usually what makes negotiation successful.

3. Talks Between North and South Korea

In June 2013, there was an opportunity for North and South Korea to come together in Seoul for high-level government talks aimed at improving their strained relationship.

However, before the talks even began, a dispute arose over the rank of each side’s chief delegate.

South Korea had appointed its vice unification minister as its chief delegate, which offended North Korea, leading them to demand a more senior representative from the South.

This escalated into a face-saving battle, with both sides refusing to back down on the delegate selection issue.

Eventually, North Korea canceled the talks, accusing the South of insulting them. This situation highlights a critical aspect of negotiations which is the importance of saving face.

In this case, South Korea missed an opportunity to engage with North Korea by not conceding on the relatively minor matter of delegate status, which would have allowed North Korea to save face.

What can I learn from it?

The lesson that you can learn from here is that in negotiations, it’s not just about the deal itself, it’s also about treating each other with respect and saving face.

Sometimes, negotiators get so caught up in looking good themselves that they forget to help the other side feel good too.

If you criticize or doubt someone too much during negotiations, it can make them feel bad and act in a way that’s not helpful. This is especially true for people who are sensitive to criticism.

So, it’s smart to understand that saving face is important, and giving in on smaller issues can make negotiations go better and keep a good relationship with the other side.

4. The Sino-British Joint Declaration

A critical negotiation that occurred more than three decades ago is gaining significance in today’s Hong Kong, which has been in a state of unrest since the introduction of an extradition bill in 2019. 

This bill could have allowed Hong Kong criminal suspects to be sent to mainland China for trial. While the bill has been withdrawn, widespread protests continue.

The negotiation in question is the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984. Back then, China’s leader and the UK’s Prime Minister talked about what would happen to Hong Kong.

The UK, which had control of Hong Kong for a long time, agreed to give it back to China on July 1, 1997. This agreement states that China’s rules for Hong Kong would stay the same for 50 years, including its legal system, until 2047.

However, China now says this deal only counted until 1997, and the UK doesn’t have rights concerning Hong Kong since then. The UK disagrees and insists that it’s still a valid deal.

This issue makes it more complicated because of recent elections in Hong Kong where pro-democracy people won, and because the US made a law supporting Hong Kong, which made China mad.

The UK is not as strong as the US, so it’s in a tough spot. However, the UK lacks the leverage the US possesses, especially with the support of the European Union.

Damaging the UK-China relationship over an issue with limited potential outcomes would be unwise, especially as the UK seeks to build alliances in a changing global landscape.

What can I learn from it?

The lesson you can learn from here is that historical negotiations and agreements can have lasting repercussions, even decades later.

It also underscores the complex challenges of international diplomacy and the need for careful consideration of national interests and alliances when dealing with contentious issues.

In this case, the UK’s position is complicated by its limited leverage compared to major global players like the US, highlighting the importance of strategic diplomacy in international relations.

5. The Biggest Ponzi Scheme in the United States

Bernie Madoff, the stockbroker behind one of the largest Ponzi schemes in the United States, had the unwitting help of many investors who trusted his fraudulent fund despite having suspicions. 

Some investors questioned how his fund consistently outperformed the stock market for years, a feat that seemed statistically impossible. However, they chose not to investigate further and brushed aside their doubts.

Harvard Business School’s Max H. Bazerman explains that even individuals with strong ethical values can engage in unethical behavior without consciously realizing it.

This phenomenon is referred to as “bounded ethicality,” where people unknowingly act against their values, especially in high-stakes situations like negotiations.

During negotiations, “ethical fading” occurs as the desire to win overshadows ethical considerations, leading to unintentional deception.

What can I learn from it?

This example highlights that ethical lapses can happen without you realizing it, especially in high-pressure situations like negotiations.

It’s important to be aware of this tendency and strive to make ethical decisions even when you’re focused on achieving your goals. This helps maintain trust and integrity in your personal and business relationships.

6. My negotiation as Procurement Manager at Ahold Delhaize

During my time as a procurement manager, I had the opportunity to engage in numerous negotiations. One particular negotiation that stands out is the one I had with a major international manufacturer who was among the top 5 suppliers for Ahold Delhaize. 

This negotiation spanned multiple countries, categories, and formats and involved up to 10 buyers and at least 20 category managers. It was a complex deal, highly significant for both Ahold Delhaize and the supplier.

Up until two years ago, our relationship with this supplier was strained, lacking in trust, and negotiations often resulted in situations where one party won at the expense of the other, which eventually led to mutual losses. 

Consequently, we experienced a decline in joint revenue, market share, and margins. As a result of customers turning away, we decided to change course by taking the following steps:

• Strategic Sessions: Throughout the year, we organized strategic sessions per country, category, and format to understand each other’s interests and build trust, to win back customers.
• Preparation for the Negotiation: Preparation has two crucial points:

➢ Internal Alignment: I set up a session to gain internal alignment on my sourcing plan and gather input. Internal negotiations are sometimes more challenging than external ones, as colleagues do not always understand why a supplier cannot meet their specific requirements.

➢Negotiation Planning: We decided to lock ourselves away for two days at an external location. It was crucial that the right people were at the table and that everyone in the office was available if needed.

• The Negotiation Itself: Because there was trust, we knew each other’s interests and the right people were present, the negotiation went smoothly. Instead of convincing each other, we made proposals to meet halfway. The result was a win-win deal within two days. We gave each other what was important, instead of taking it away.

Throughout the year, we saw the results: revenue grew, we gained market share, and margins increased significantly.

What have I learned from it?

Most of the negotiation takes place throughout the year. By organizing the right sessions, trust and understanding are built.

A ‘deal a day’ approach works effectively; by locking ourselves away for the negotiation, we closed a deal in two days that normally would have taken weeks or months.

Carrots work better than sticks. Giving each other something and trading for something important is more valuable than working with sticks, where you take things away. I have always tried to maintain this mindset thereafter.

Procurement Expert’s Advice on Negotiation Examples

For this article, we asked an experienced procurement expert to share her insights to help answer common questions about negotiation examples.

Conclusion

The stories that we’ve shared with you can teach you how you can be adaptable and a forward-thinker in negotiations.

In negotiations, you must always strive for a win-win situation for you to build a strong relationship with the other party. The lessons that you learned hold relevance not just in business but also in your everyday interactions and relationships with your family, friends, and co-workers.