Specialist Assessments
Go deeper into how you negotiate.
The Elite Negotiator Index™ provides the integrated picture. Six Specialist Assessments let you explore specific aspects of your negotiation behavior in greater depth, each with a dedicated report and development guidance.
Choose one area to explore — or build your complete profile progressively.
Illustrative Negotiation Style profile. Your report is based on your own responses.
Choose your Specialist Assessment.
Each assessment provides a dedicated report with insights and development guidance.
Influence Profile
Explore how you persuade, build credibility and influence others.
Explore AssessmentEthical Risk Profile
Understand how pressure may affect your ethical judgment and boundaries.
Explore AssessmentEmotional Intelligence
Explore how you recognize and manage emotions during negotiation.
Explore AssessmentInterpersonal Needs
Understand the interpersonal needs that shape your interactions.
Explore AssessmentMotivation & Conflict
Explore what drives your decisions and how you respond to conflict.
Explore AssessmentSee what you receive.
Explore examples of the insights presented in each Specialist Assessment report.
This sample uses fictional participant data to illustrate the report format and types of insights provided.
Negotiation Style Profile
Use this report as a practical guide to how you tend to negotiate in this specific area. Start with your overall pattern, then look at the scores and behaviours behind it. Pay particular attention to where your strengths may become less useful under pressure and to the development actions you can test in real negotiations.
There are no 'good' or 'bad' profiles. The value comes from understanding your natural tendencies, where they help you and where greater choice could improve your effectiveness.
This specialist assessment is part of the Elite Negotiator Index™. It is a developmental self-report tool designed to support reflection and professional development in negotiation.
Your results describe patterns in the responses you provided. They are not a clinical assessment, a measure of personal worth, or a ranking against other negotiators.
Your Profile at a Glance
Your negotiation style is led by Integrating and reinforced by Driving. You search for the value that positional bargainers miss — trades that cost one side little but mean a lot to the other — and you have the conviction to pursue your own interests once the value is clear. Deferring is your least-used style: you rarely let the counterpart set the agenda, which gives you control of the process but can make you appear inflexible where deference would earn trust.
Scores range from 38 to 88 out of 100. A 50-point spread between your strongest and weakest styles shows a clear, deliberate profile rather than a flat, undifferentiated one.
Your two strongest styles work as a pair: Integrating searches for joint gains, Driving gives the conviction to pursue your interests once the value is clear. Counterparts experience you as collaborative but not soft.
The 50-point spread between your strongest and weakest styles means you have a recognisable negotiation style. A flat profile usually signals lack of self-awareness about which approaches you actually reach for.
Deferring is your least-used style. You rarely let the counterpart set the agenda, which gives you process control but can leave you without a tool to earn goodwill or surface information on low-stakes issues.
Your agreements are durable because you integrate well and drive firmly. The missing tool is deference. In your next negotiation, identify one low-stakes issue where you can deliberately let the counterpart lead — not to concede your interests, but to earn goodwill and surface information. Strategic deference is a tool, not a weakness.
Your Negotiation Style Signature™
How your five negotiation styles combine.
How Your Pattern Works
You work to understand the counterpart's underlying interests and search for solutions that expand value for both sides. You ask questions, trade differences, and build toward joint gains.
Counterparts experience you as someone who expands the pie rather than slicing it. They share information they would withhold from a purely positional negotiator.
You pursue your own outcomes with conviction. You enter negotiation with a clear position, advocate it directly, and work to move the counterpart toward your preferred result.
Counterparts take your proposals seriously because you advocate them clearly. Your Integrating keeps Driving from crowding the counterpart out.
Integrating and Driving work as a sequence. Integrating opens the space — you understand the counterpart's interests and search for joint gains. Driving closes it — once the value is clear, you pursue your share with conviction.
The risk is that the sequence favours advocacy over patience. When a negotiation is time-pressured or the counterpart is purely positional, you may push (Driving) before you have fully explored (Integrating), or continue exploring past the point where a Trading move would be more efficient.
They didn't just push for their position — they understood what I needed and found a way to create value for both of us. But when it mattered, they were clear and direct about what they wanted.
Sometimes I wanted them to let me lead on a point that mattered more to me than to them. They pushed their own approach even where stepping back would have built goodwill.
Watch-Outs and Risks
Your signature is value-creating conviction. The watch-out is not overuse of a single style — it is under-use of Deferring. You rarely let the counterpart lead, which gives you process control but can make you appear inflexible and leave you without a tool to earn goodwill on low-stakes issues.
| Style | Possible Overuse |
|---|---|
| Driving | When overused, Driving can crowd out the counterpart, narrow the space for joint gains, and damage relationships that matter beyond this single deal. |
| Integrating | When overused, Integrating can slow negotiations, over-invest in low-stakes issues, and signal that you will always concede to preserve harmony. |
| Trading | When overused, Trading can leave value on the table by splitting differences rather than exploring interests, and can feel transactional to relationship-focused counterparts. |
| Deferring | When overused, Deferring allows the counterpart to set the terms, leaves your interests unrepresented, and can signal that your priorities do not matter. |
| Yielding | When overused, Yielding sacrifices your legitimate interests, trains the counterpart to expect concessions, and can produce agreements you later regret. |
Before applying a negotiation tactic, ask:
If not, reconsider the tactic.
Your Development Plan
In your next negotiation, identify one low-stakes issue where you can deliberately let the counterpart lead. Notice whether deference earns goodwill or surfaces information without costing you anything of substance.
Before pushing (Driving), ask whether you have explored enough (Integrating). Before continuing to explore, ask whether a simple trade (Trading) would serve everyone better.
Watch for the moment you have enough information to close. Integrating past that point is exploration for its own sake — and it can signal that you will always concede to preserve harmony.
Choose a negotiation this week where you would normally lead. Identify one low-stakes issue where you can deliberately defer to the counterpart. Write down what you hope to gain from deference — goodwill, information, or trust.
Let the counterpart lead on that issue. Notice whether deference changes the dynamic — and whether you can defer without feeling you have conceded something important.
Ask yourself: did strategic deference earn goodwill or surface information? Did it feel like a tool or a weakness? If it felt like a weakness, what would make it feel deliberate next time?
The best negotiator is not the one with the highest score on any single style. It is the one who can choose the right style for the right situation — Integrating to create value, Driving to pursue it, Trading to close, Deferring to earn goodwill, and Yielding when the relationship matters more than the outcome.
This profile reflects your self-reported negotiation style tendencies. It shows the approaches you tend to use most naturally, not a judgment of your effectiveness. No style is inherently better than another — effectiveness comes from range and the discipline to match your style to the situation. Every style can be used well or poorly; the objective is awareness, range and deliberate choice.
Synthetic sample report — all scores and narratives are illustrative and do not represent any real respondent.
Your personal report is generated from your own assessment responses and will differ from this illustrative sample.
These assessments are designed for self-awareness and professional development, not for hiring or employee-performance evaluation.
Assessment Methodology & Validation