I N T E R E S T  B A S E D  A P P R O A C H
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network





Slideshow for EE80s Lab 5.2

Slideshow for EE80s Lab 5.2



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 13

http://ee80s.pbworks.com 11
http://enteria.pbworks.com 2



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

I N T E R E S T B A S E D A P P R O A C H Presentation Transcript

  • 1. INTEREST-BASED APPROACH to Problem Solving & Decision-making CCSC Thursday, April 19, 2007
  • 2. Intro/Overview
    • What is the Interest Based Approach (IBA)?
      • Based on interests (rather than positions )
      • Sometimes called “mutual gains” or “principled negotiation”
    • Various contexts in which IBA is used
      • Labor/management; env. conflict res; interpersonal; business contracts; international conflicts
    • How is it different from traditional negotiation?
      • Parties seek to “expand the pie” rather than divvy up a “fixed pie.”
    • When to use / when not to use IBA
    • Importance of relationships (relate to NVC)
      • Respect; autonomy; truthfulness; clarity; equity; trust
  • 3. Learning Outcomes
    • Five Key Points about IBA
    • The difference between positions ( what ) and interests ( why )
    • Why it is useful to “unpack” them
    • Strategies for success of the IBA process
    • Interactive: Conference with a Professor
      • Tell the truth in a way that strengthens the relationship; deal with other issues on their merits; develop solutions that meet interests.
  • 4. How is IBA different from positional bargaining?
    • PEOPLE: Separate the people from the problem
    • INTERESTS: Focus on interests, not positions
    • OPTIONS: Generate a variety of options before deciding what to do (including mix & match)
      • objective standards
      • how well option meets separate & mutual interests
    • CONSENSUS decision-making
  • 5. Point One Separate People from Problem
    • Focus on issues – not personalities or “who did what when”
    • Describe – do not blame or characterize (NVC: observations)
    • Focus on the actual problem: CPR
    • Be mindful of physical positions
      • Side by side
      • Not face to face or across the table
  • 6. Point Two Focus on Interests not Positions
    • Positions (what): solutions, strategies, demands
    • Interests (why): values, needs, motivations
    • Why do you think it might be important to “unpack” them?
      • Positions represent limited “pie”
      • Interests offer possibility to expand the pie
      • Relationships improved
      • Agreements more easily implemented
      • Agreements last / not subject to challenge
  • 7. More About Interests vs. Positions Feelings, emotions: hurt, anger, sadness; Needs: respect, consideration (NVC bridge) Things you say you will/ will not do: I won’t call you until you call me to apologize Aspirations, future hopes, standards: professional quality, aesthetics, meaningful contribution Terms & Conditions I will not submit this report until I think it is ready Needs, values, concerns: health, safety, on time to school, responsibility Demands: Clean up your room right now! Underlying motivations: organic, locally grown, good wine, open late, ambiance Things you say you want: I want to go to Avanti for dinner tonight! Interests (why) Positions (what)
  • 8. Story (choose one)
      • Queen of Orange-Landia
        • Small kingdom: Queen and three subjects
        • One orange > divided three ways > 3 “equal” parts
        • No one happy! Why ?
        • Rind – juice – pithy center > each got only 1/3 of what they needed
          • Question assumptions re: “pie is limited”
          • Seek to understand interests (ask “why”)
          • Explore options (ACBD)
      • The Bakers and the Egg
        • Two competitive bakers in same bakery: one egg remaining – “indivisible”
        • Broke – Oh no, my yellow cake / Oh no, my angel cake
        • Instead of two cakes > No cakes!
          • Lack of communication > did not buy more eggs
          • Lack of trust > not “tip off” the competition
          • Ineffective communication & lack of clarity on interests > inefficiency, loss of productivity, loss of opportunity
  • 9. Interactive Exercise: Guess the Interests! Palestine: viable political state Israel: land & water No more settlements in the West Bank! International Mom/Dad: health Kids: fun! I want krispy kremes for dinner Family Buyer: Financial well being Seller: Financial well being I refuse to pay > 10 % commission Business Water District: water supply Fish advocates: sustainable fishery Put more water in this stream! Environment Employees: incentives Management: $ certainty We want bonuses of $1K each quarter Labor Interests Position Context
  • 10. Point Three: Generating Options
    • Define/clarify the problem to be solved
    • Generate many possibilities
    • Record ALL ideas
    • No attribution / no evaluation
    • Remember: Options =/= commitment!
    • Be curious / be creative
      • Mix & match; play “what if”; reverse; keep asking “why”
    • Winnow the list
    • Build on promising “possibles”
  • 11. Point Four: Develop Objective Criteria
    • Objective criteria = independent of the will of all sides
    • Examples:
      • Do-able: money, resources, time
      • Politically viable , fits organization culture
      • Data: agreement on data & interpretation of…
    • Meets separate and mutual interests
  • 12. Point Five Evaluation & Decision Making
    • Be clear on what a good outcome looks like
      • Increases opportunities / creates value
      • Better than your BATNA / others’ BATNA’s
      • Specifies commitments for implementation & monitor.
    • Assess how well options meet criteria
    • Yield to principle, not to pressure
    • Use TRUE consensus to decide
      • Everyone in the group supports or can live with a particular decision =/= unanimous or everyone happy
    • Question: experience of the group w/consensus?
  • 13. Behaviors that Support Consensus
    • Listen non-judgmentally
    • Check for understanding
    • Be open / authentic / honest
    • Allow enough time
    • Support / build on each other’s thoughts
    • Build a “golden bridge” (make it easy
  • 14. Strategies for Success: Key Review Points
    • Separate the People from the Problem
    • Focus on Interests not Positions
    • Invent Creative Options for Mutual Gain
    • Use Objective Criteria
    • Use Consensus to decide
    • Engage Behaviors that Support Consensus
    • Two New Points:
      • Get Buy in to use this Process
      • Get Agreement on Ground Rules
  • 15. How is IBA different from positional bargaining or problem solving ?
      • It builds relationships
      • It promotes creative solutions
      • It identifies ways to satisfy the interests of several parties with one solution
      • It focuses on “making the pie bigger” rather than dividing up the existing one
      • It builds collaborative solutions with strong buy-in among multiple stakeholders
      • It generates agreements that last
  • 16. Mini-Negotiation: “Conference w/a Professor” (40 min)
    • Read scenario to whole class / Q & A (5)
    • Clarify Context (2 people) and Challenge: Tell the truth in a way that strengthens the relationship and allows other issues to be dealt with on their merits (5)
    • Identify Process themes (5)
      • Communication; separate people from problem; power imbalance; issue control; interpersonal skills.
    • Set up in Groups of Four (5)
      • 2 negotiators; 2 coaches
    • Prepare (5)
      • read confidential instructions
      • Confer with coach
    • Negotiate (10)
    • Debrief (5)
      • Aha’s? Surprises? What worked well? Take-aways for other situations? AND what didn’t work well? Do different next time?
  • 17. Readings & Resources
    • Getting to Yes , Fisher & Ury
    • “ Getting to Yes ,” (A review of the book by Glaser, Conflict Research Consortium)
    • “ Inventing Options for Mutual Gain,” http://www.va.gov/adr/invent.html
    • Getting Past No , Ury
    • “ Interest-Based Aikido: Taming the Positional Tiger,” Neil Bodine
    • “ Find More Value at the Bargaining Table,”
      • (Lawrence Susskind, Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School)