Honesty in Contracting

Published: 07 Feb 2020 Average Rating: unrated Print

Author: Tim Cummins

Conventional wisdom is that Sales and Marketing should extol the benefits of a product or service and avoid mention of any possible drawbacks or negatives. Those aspects are covered by the contract, typically in the form of limitations with regard to performance or use, but also in terms of potential recourse. In other words, we all know that sales people and marketing materials tell only part of the story and the contract often conveys a very different message.

Is this approach actually smart or effective? Especially in today's environment of increased openness, would honesty and transparency be a much better policy? It seems obvious that this would at least lead to higher levels of trust and might reduce the amount of time spent on negotiation, but at what cost? For example, does honesty deter potential buyers or cause them to switch to a less honest competitor?

Recent research published in the Harvard Business School working  papers suggests that Sales and Marketing may have got it all wrong and that honesty has multiple benefits – more business, faster business and greater customer loyalty. The paper describes large-scale experiments where a business set out the benefits of their product or service, but also explained the limits or trade-offs. This meant that potential customers were much better informed in making their decision and no longer had to scour the small print in a contract to understand the offering or its limits.

How far can this extend? Right now, the research appears only to relate to consumer and small business markets, but might there be similar benefits in larger scale business-to-business contracts? Recent IACCM research into 'as-a-Service' contracting certainly suggests that there could be. IACCM discovered that offerings such as Cloud computing suffer significant delays in adoption due to a lack of clear understanding and unrealistic customer expectations. The advantages of lower prices, greater flexibility and reduced investment require customers to accept some loss of control and very little flexibility in negotiating terms. Perhaps explaining these trade-offs in the initial sales materials would similarly result in faster and better informed decisions as well as greater respect and trust in a supplier's integrity.


Related Discussions

Please sign in or register to post on this forum

UK Department for Education
2017-05-26 09:59:56

Getting tradesmen to sign up to (small scale) construction contracts

When I listened to this presentation it got me thinking about the type of contracts I've had with tradesmen working on my home (outside work) and it's difficult to get...
Replies: 2

NetApp UK Ltd
2015-07-27 04:28:29

Collaborative Negotiating

We're hearing more and more that a collaborative approach to negotiations is a good way to manage the risk in contracts - but it's not always easy to create the buy-in...
Replies: 6

BT Procurement
2020-03-10 09:54:15

Article - Are negotiators in the Western world stupid?

Bold title but a really interesting talking point- the strong focus and priority Asian culture puts on relationships and communication in a negotiation process. This e...
Replies: 1

Victorian Council - Australia
2020-01-19 23:26:51

Contract extension beyond terms (Special)

Can we extend the contract beyond its original term? Even if the maximum extension period has been reached. Say for a contract of 2 years plus 1+1 years. I come to ci...
Replies: 3

Leonardo MW Ltd
2020-01-14 15:48:34

Justifying a commercial item in Defence Contracting

Hi all, Working in a UK Defence Company, we are relatively new to contracting with the U.S Department of Defence. We are attempting to justify our product as a Comm...
Replies: 1

TP Group plc
2019-12-05 13:49:10

Negotiation techniques

Reading through the negotiation case study, I find the most powerful part of negotiation is to use a if you...then we... statement to ensure you are always gaining som...
Replies: 1