During the interactive process of issue resolution, client managers may develop expectations about the auditor’s position. We examine the effect that negative expectancy violations have on managers’ pre-negotiation positions and how relational familiarity can moderate this effect. Through a series of experiments, we find that, when the partner’s proposed adjustment is within the client’s original expectations, managers offer greater concessions to a more familiar partner than to a less familiar partner. However, depending on relational familiarity, client managers react to expectancy violations very differently. Managers react more severely when a more familiar partner violates expectations, offering lower negotiation concessions than when no violation occurs. In contrast, managers tend to ignore violations committed by a less familiar partner, offering similar negotiation concessions whether or not a violation has occurred. Furthermore, we find support for a practical intervention to repair damage from expectancy violations committed by more familiar partners.