YOU WIN THE DEAL AND LOSE THE NEGOTIATION: WHAT NO ONE CALCULATES BEFORE SITTING AT THE TABLE

Winning a deal and losing the negotiation is more common than it seems. Discover the hidden subjective value that determines what happens after the ink dries. – Marcello de Souza
You closed. The contract is signed. The numbers worked out exactly the way you wanted.
And yet, three months later, the other side isn’t delivering with the commitment you expected. Meetings have a coldness that’s hard to name. Emails take longer to be answered. When something unexpected comes up — and it always does — the negotiation to resolve it is harder than it should be.
You look at the deal on paper and it’s there, intact.
But something fundamental between you was, somehow, lost.
How does this happen?
There is a category of outcome in negotiation that doesn’t appear in any spreadsheet and rarely enters any performance evaluation. It operates parallel to the economic agreement, has its own logic, and in real situations where the same people need to work together after the ink dries, it’s a more powerful predictor of future behavior than the value of the contract itself.
Researchers who spent years studying what people actually value when negotiating reached a conclusion that should disturb any executive accustomed to measuring results only by numbers: what determines whether someone will fulfill the agreement with good will, will want to negotiate with you again, or will look for an exit at the first opportunity isn’t how much they gained on paper.
It’s how they felt treated during the process.
This has a name — subjective value. And it organizes itself into four dimensions that most people never bother to examine: how the person evaluated the outcome they obtained, how they felt about themselves during the conversation, how they perceived the quality of the relationship with you, and whether they thought the process was conducted with genuine fairness and respect.
The most disturbing discovery is this: subjective value predicts future decisions better than the objective value of the agreement.
A person who left with less than they could have obtained, but who felt treated with dignity and perceived that the process was honest, will behave radically differently in the next rounds than a person who extracted the best proposal and left feeling they were managed, calculated, or simply ignored as a human being.
You may have won the deal. And lost the negotiation.
There’s something even deeper than this — and this is where almost every analysis stops.
Every negotiation carries within itself another negotiation. One that happens in silence, off the agenda, that no one prepared for.
It’s the negotiation about who each person will be recognized as being in that encounter.
Every human being enters any high-tension situation carrying a need that they rarely verbalize, but that operates at full force: the need for their identity to be confirmed. Not praised. Not flattered. Confirmed. That the way you see yourself be recognized as legitimate by the person in front of you.
Think of an experienced director who enters a negotiation with a strategic supplier. He masters the numbers, knows the market, has decades of consolidated history. When the other side conducts the conversation in a way that, however subtly, treats him as someone who needs to be convinced rather than as someone with whom something is being built together — something changes.
Not in the logic. In the disposition.
An imperceptible tension sets in and will color every subsequent proposal, not because the numbers worsened, but because that professional began negotiating, also, to protect who he is.
This happens everywhere, all the time — and almost always unintentionally.
An explanation offered before being asked. An objection anticipated before being raised. A phrase that begins with “let me show you” when the other hasn’t even finished asking. These are small gestures, often well-intentioned, that carry within them a message that no one consciously formulated but that the other side receives clearly: you don’t trust that they’ll get there on their own.
You’ve probably felt this from the other side of the table. That moment when someone answers what you haven’t said yet — and you perceive, without being able to name it, that you’re being managed rather than met. That the conversation was already decided before you opened your mouth.
Each of these moments enters an evaluation system that operates far below conscious conversation. Silently, it produces states that will direct behaviors that, days later, neither party will be able to explain rationally.
The agreement may be signed. The relationship, not.
Now pause.
Not to continue reading. To ask yourself something with honesty:
What state do you enter your most important negotiations in?
Not the state you describe. The real one — the one that’s functioning when you hear the first unexpected counterproposal, when you face a silence you didn’t anticipate, when you realize the conversation is going somewhere different from what you planned.
There’s something about self-control in pressure situations that deserves attention: this capacity isn’t fixed. It fluctuates. It fluctuates as a function of how much has already been demanded before that moment.
A manager who arrives at the negotiation after an entire day managing conflicts, making difficult decisions, and containing reactions in previous meetings arrives with reduced repertoire. Even if they don’t perceive it. And it’s exactly in these moments that more primitive patterns emerge: rigidity where there should be flexibility, reactivity where there should be presence, closure where there should be genuine openness.
This isn’t weakness. It’s human functioning.
The problem is when there isn’t sufficient self-awareness to perceive that you entered this state — and the person continues believing they’re negotiating with their most capable version, when in practice they’re negotiating with their most exhausted version.
Think of a scene you’ve probably already lived.
You’re in an important contract renewal negotiation. Prepared. You know what you need to defend. And then the other side does something that wasn’t in the script: instead of going straight to the point, they spend the first twenty minutes talking about the internal challenges they’re facing, changes in the team, pressures that came from above.
What happens inside you?
For most people, a subtle tension appears. The thought that isn’t said out loud, but that’s present: this is going off-script. I need to bring it back. And thus, even if the external behavior seems attentive, internally you’ve already left the conversation that’s happening to manage the conversation you had planned.
What did you lose in those twenty minutes?
Perhaps the most valuable information in the entire negotiation. The key to understanding what the other side really needs — not what they’re asking for, but what they would need to feel safe saying yes. Perhaps the chance to be the only person that day who treated that professional as someone with a story that matters, not just as a function to be managed.
Real listening isn’t technique. It’s the state in which you’re sufficiently secure in yourself to let the other reach you — without controlling the direction, without calculating the response while the other is still speaking, without using silence as a strategic position rather than as genuine presence.
This state isn’t learned in a workshop. It’s built in the relationship you have with yourself outside of negotiations: in how you deal with uncertainty, with contradiction, with the simple fact that you may be wrong about something you thought was consolidated.
There’s an illusion of control that runs through almost everything taught about negotiation: the idea that sufficient preparation eliminates human unpredictability. That if you know the other side’s position well, their alternatives and their interests, you can construct a path that leads exactly where you want.
This illusion is seductive because it’s partially true. Preparation matters. Knowledge matters.
But what it omits is that every real negotiation happens between two people who are both works in progress — with histories that precede them, with internal states that vary from day to day, with the capacity to surprise themselves in the same measure that they surprise others.
And when you enter believing you control the process because you control the external variables, you neglect the only variable that’s completely under your influence and that you rarely examine with honesty:
Yourself.
What do you believe, deep down, about the person in front of you? That they’re trying to take advantage? That they’re reasonable, but will need to be led? That there exists a genuinely good outcome for both sides?
These beliefs aren’t neutral. They shape every choice — how much you reveal, how much you hide, how much space you create for something different from what you planned to emerge. And they are perceived. In the same way that you perceive when someone is really present in a conversation and when they’re merely administering presence.
Agreements that last have a mark that no contract can capture.
Both sides leave with the feeling that they were seen as whole people — not as functions, not as obstacles, not as problems to solve. This perception is what will determine the other side’s behavior when circumstances change, when something unexpected arises, when the agreement needs to be revised.
In these moments, what will matter won’t be the contract text.
It will be the memory of how that person was treated when everything was still uncertain.
This isn’t idealism. It’s the most strategic calculation that exists in a negotiation — and the least taught.
The question that remains isn’t about technique. It’s simpler and much more difficult:
Are you sufficiently present with yourself to be able to be present with the other?
The other side of the table always feels when the answer is no. Even if they never say it. Even if they sign.
It’s in this space — that no spreadsheet captures and no two-day training reaches — that the real negotiation happens.
Or fails to happen.
If this question stayed with you, there’s much more to explore. Hundreds of texts about what really moves human decisions, relationships, and organizations await you at marcellodesouza.com.br
#negotiation #selfawareness #subjectivevalue #leadership #emotionalintelligence #humanrelationships #presence #behavior #humandevelopment #trust #internalstate #consciousness #organizationaldevelopment #decisionmaking #marcellodesouza #marcellodesouzaofficial #coachingandyou
Marcello de Souza | Coaching & You marcellodesouza.com.br © All rights reserved