Article

How are metaphors used in negotiation? A communication context analysis

---

Abstract

This study explores how metaphors can be used in negotiation to convey meaning and understanding about abstract concepts. The authors identify and synthesize the experiences of practicing negotiators and provide practical recommendations regarding the use of metaphors before, during, and after a negotiation. Data was collected from 20 practicing negotiators by way of semi-structured interviews, transcribed and analyzed by way of a thematic analysis. Adair et al.’s (2016, 2024) model of contextual dimensions of communication acted as a coding framework. A thematic analysis of interview data complements the existing literature on metaphors and negotiation. The findings confirm that negotiators use metaphors before, during, and after negotiations. The predominant use of metaphors occurs in a contextual relationship or spatial dimension of communication as opposed to a message, or time context. Further, there are various positive effects of using metaphors in negotiations: facilitating communication, positively influencing the emotional environment, and acting as helpful mental models in the preparation and follow-up of negotiation meetings. The principal practical take-aways for negotiators from our study are: 1) When negotiating, it is generally beneficial for the process and outcome of the negotiation to use metaphors; 2) To improve the strategic use of metaphors in negotiation, it is useful to critically reflect on the types, origins, and uses of one’s own metaphors; 3) Metaphors are useful for summarizing and integrating information in the context of negotiation; 4) Metaphoric language can be used to improve the atmosphere in a negotiation meeting or to get across a difficult point.

Keywords: Negotiation, Communication, Metaphor, Mental Models, Interview Data, Thematic Analysis

How to Cite:

Poliakova, E., Lempp, F. & Liu, L., (2025) “How are metaphors used in negotiation? A communication context analysis”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 18(1), 69-93. doi: https://doi.org/10.34891/we3z-eg67