CIPS L5M15 Advanced Negotiation Exam Practice Test

Push tactics emphasise advocacy: using facts, logic, and directive communication to move others. They can deliver short-term compliance and clarity but may limit ownership/commitment compared with pull tactics, which are more involving and collaborative.

Reciprocated concessionsoccur when both sides trade something of value—such as exchanging discounts for improved terms. This supports balanced negotiation progress and fosters trust.

“Warm and tough” means balancing firmness on issues with respect and empathy in style. Confidence and assertiveness maintain authority while preserving positive tone—ideal for collaborative negotiation.

When negotiations stall, best practice (according to CIPS) is topause the meetingrather than escalate tension or concede prematurely. Taking a break allows time to reflect, regroup, and explore creative solutions. Other remedies include summarising agreed points, involving a neutral mediator, or escalating strategically.

Power distancegauges how cultures accept unequal power distribution and hierarchy—key to planning authority lines, escalation, and decision-making in cross-cultural negotiations.

Trust in negotiation is built when a counterpart is perceived as both capable (competence) and benevolent (care). Without either dimension, relationships may erode into mere respect or distrust.

“Principled negotiation” (sometimes called the Harvard method) is built on four pillars: (1) separate people from the problem; (2) focus on interests, not positions; (3) generate options for mutual gain; and (4) use objective criteria. Bob’s focus on creating options for mutual gain signals the principled approach.

Expert powerderives from specialised knowledge, experience, or skill. The Technical Design Head, as the specification creator, holds expert authority influencing decisions through technical competence rather than hierarchy.

Cross-cultural negotiation factors include social/ethical norms, legal and political systems, business systems, infrastructure, and financial/fiscal systems. “Environment” in the ecological sense is not typically classified by CIPS as a cross-cultural negotiation factor.

TheKraljic Matrixis used to assess procurement categories and supplier relationships based onvalue and risk, helping buyers tailor their negotiation and relationship management strategies.

The “marginal gains” philosophy is that making numerous small, continuous improvements across processes results in significant overall performance enhancement. This principle is often applied to supplier development and continuous improvement programmes.

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) profiles personality preferences (e.g., introversion/extraversion). It is not a measure of intelligence or job competence.

Positional bargainingstarts from fixed stances and tends toward adversarial exchanges and concession trading, often impeding creative, interest-based outcomes.

Parallel working (or parallel running)is used when switching suppliers to ensure continuity of supply. Both suppliers operate simultaneously for a transition period until the new supplier demonstrates stability and quality.

Framinginvolves guiding attention toward specific consequences or perspectives. By emphasising the outcome of no agreement, Dominic reframes the discussion around the implications of failure, potentially prompting reconsideration.

Separating people from the problem means you treat the relationship and the substantive issues as distinct. Pushback on a proposal is not a personal attack; it’s part of clarifying interests and criteria. Keeping relationship concerns separate helps maintain respect and reduces defensiveness.

Key playersin Mendelow’s Stakeholder Matrix (high power, high interest) must beactively engagedand involved in important decisions. Meetings are an effective way to build commitment, gain input, and secure their ongoing support.

CIPS distinguishes betweenhonestyandopenness. Negotiators must always acthonestly(ethical integrity), butopenness—disclosing all information—can weaken your position. The key is to balance transparency with confidentiality and strategic discretion.

Rationalisingbelongs to thepush influencing style. It uses logic, facts, and evidence to convince others, leveraging authority or data. It contrasts withpull techniquessuch as inspiring and consulting, which engage others collaboratively.

Not all negotiations need formal rehearsals. Forroutine or low-value supplier interactions, preparation may be minimal. Rehearsals are best suited forstrategic or high-stakesnegotiations involving teams or complex outcomes.

Crossed arms are commonly read as closed/defensive, which can hinder rapport. In contrast, natural smiling, appropriate eye contact, and subtle mirroring generally support openness and trust.

Gamesmanship/brinkmanshipare aggressive, high-pressure tactics that can harm relationships. They are generally reserved forone-off or transactionalsituations where ongoing relationship quality is not a priority.

The six recognisedbases of powerare informational, legitimate, referent, coercive, reward, and expert. Financial power is not classified separately—it can fall under reward or resource power, but not as a formal category.

Pressure tacticsare categorised as “hard” negotiation behaviours. They apply coercion or authority to gain compliance. In contrast, tactics such as collaboration, inspirational appeal, and rational persuasion are “soft” and relationship-oriented.

“Apprising” means spelling out how a proposal benefits the other party (e.g., efficiencies, cost savings, risk reduction). It’s a classic soft, pull-style tactic that aims to increase willingness by linking options to the counterpart’s interests.

Aconflict of interestarises when personal relationships or financial interests could influence—or appear to influence—professional judgement. It must be declared and managed to maintain ethical integrity.