Interviews are riddled with unspoken negotiations, with both parties bound to the push and pull of obtaining and withholding information. For an interviewee, the optimal outcome is to be trusted and liked by one’s interviewer, and—most importantly—hired at the highest possible salary. However, unwelcome questions can expose information that compromises economic gains, social gains, or both. In insightful new work, HKUST’s Brad Bitterly and colleague Maurice Schweitzer describe how deflection can be used by interviewees to obtain the best possible economic and social outcomes.
“Do you have any other offers?” For many interviewees, the answer is “No.” Inevitably, negotiations involve responding to questions that we cannot or would rather not answer. If we answer honestly, we show our mettle as a trustworthy character, but we may suffer financially as a result. Declining to answer can cause both social and economic harm, “since people tend to dislike individuals who decline to disclose information about themselves,” explain the authors. Lying is the riskiest option of all.
There may be another, safer strategy: deflection. For example, an interviewee who is asked, “Do you have any other offers?” might counter with, “Are you planning to make me an offer?” This promptly shifts the dynamic, often resulting in a win–win situation. “Deflection can help you avoid suffering economic or social penalties that might come with being honest, declining to answer, or lying,” suggest the researchers.
They tested this hypothesis in five experimental studies with more than 2,000 participants, who took the role of art sellers tasked with selling a painting. They were told that they could demand a steeper price if the buyer—played by a research assistant—already had a piece from the same collection. In scripted responses to the question “Do you have any other pieces from this collection?”, the buyer either answered honestly, refused to disclose the information, responded with what the sellers later discovered was a lie, or deflected by asking, “How much do you want for this piece?”
As expected, deflection was the best negotiation strategy, putting as many as 76.9% of the sellers on the back foot. An honest buyer was liked and trusted by the sellers, but ended up spending more money on the piece. Refusing to answer led to lower prices but also reduced the sellers’ trust and liking. Outright lying led to better economic outcomes than deflection did, but in such cases sellers trusted the buyer much less. “Buyers who deflected struck a balance,” report the authors. “They achieved lower prices than honest buyers, and were better liked and trusted than buyers who declined to disclose.”
“Why does deflection work so well in response to tricky questions?” wondered the researchers. In their study, the success of deflection seemed to hinge on the perception that the buyer was genuinely seeking information rather than being deceptive or concealing the truth. “Because we generally like people who are curious and open,” the authors speculate, “deflection can boost trust and liking compared to declining to disclose or deception.”
The authors offer tips on deflection for both interviewers and interviewees, such as anticipating difficult questions, developing the right responses, and—if the roles are reversed—preparing to defend against deflection. “By focusing on how to deflect difficult questions, we can guide conversation and protect our interests,” conclude the researchers. “The next time that you are asked a difficult question, consider posing a new one.”