Any method of negotiation may be fairly judged by three criteria: produce a wise agreement if agreement is possiblebe efficientimprove or at least not damage the relationship between the parties
Amicably (adv): at goodwill
Consider the story of two men quarreling in a library. One wants the window open and theother wants it closed. They bicker back and forth about how much to leave it open: a crack,halfway, three quarters of the way. No solution satisfies them both.Enter the librarian. She asks one why he wants the window open: "To get some fresh air."She asks the other why he wants it closed: "To avoid the draft." After thinking a minute, sheopens wide a window in the next room, bringing in fresh air without a draft.Basic human needs include:• security• economic well-being• a sense of belonging• recognition• control over one's life
Jack Sprat could eat no fatHis wife could eat no lean,And so betwixt them bothThey licked the platter clean.
Show case study of “It’s company policy”
Relative negotiating power of 2 parties depends primarily upon how attractive to each is the option of not reaching agreementBATNA: Best Alternative to a Negotiated AgreementIf the other side’s BATNA is so good, consider how to can change it
Jujitsu:An art of weaponless self-defense developed in Japan that uses throws, holds, and blows and derives added power from the attacker's own weight and strength.
Mediator can easily separate the people from the problem, separate inventing from deciding
About the Authors• Roger Fisher: Williston Professor of Law and Director of the Harvard Negotiation Project• William Ury: Director of the Negotiation Network at Harvard University and Associate Director of the Harvard Negotiation Project
Table of Content• The Problem• The Method• Yes, But…• In Conclusion• 10 Questions People Ask
Positional Negotiation• Produces unwise agreements• Inefficient• Endangers an ongoing relationship• Gets worse with many parties involved• Soft/Hard positional negotiation
Principled Negotiation• People: Separate the people from the problem• Interests: Focus on interests, not positions• Options: Invent options for mutual gain• Criteria: Insist on using objective criteria
Positional vs Principled NegotiationSoft Hard Principled• Participants are friends • Participants are adversaries • Participants are problem-solvers• The goal is agreement • The goal is victory • The goal is a wise outcome reached efficiently and amicably• Make concessions to cultivate the • Demand concessions as a • Separate the people from the relationship condition of the relationship problem• Be soft on the people and the • Be hard on the problem and the • Be soft on the people, hard on problem people the problem• Trust others • Distrust others • Proceed independent of trust• Change your position easily • Dig in to your position • Focus on interests, not positions• Make offers • Make threats • Explore interests• Disclose your bottom line • Mislead as to your bottom line • Avoid having a bottom line• Accept one-sided losses to reach • Demand one-sided gains as the • Invent options for mutual gain agreement price of agreement• Search for the single answer: the • Search for the single answer: the • Develop multiple options to one they will accept one you will accept choose from; decide later• Insist on agreement • Insist on your position • Insist on using objective criteria• Try to avoid a contest of will • Try to win a contest of will • Try to reach a result based on standards independent of will• Yield to pressure • Apply pressure • Reason and be open to reasons; yield to principle, not pressure
1. Separate the PEOPLE from the problem• Separate the relationship from the substance; deal directly with the people problem• Prevention works best• Side-by-side search for a fair agreement
Deal with people problem• Perception – Put yourself in their shoes – Discuss perceptions explicitly – Look for facts inconsistent with their perceptions – Give them a stake in the outcome by participating in the process – Face-saving: make proposals consistent with their values• Emotion – Make emotions explicit, acknowledge them as valid – Allow the other side to let off steam – Dont react to emotional outbursts – Use symbolic gestures• Communication – Listen actively and acknowledge what is being said – Speak to be understood – Speak about yourself, not about them – Speak for a purpose
2. Focus on INTERESTs, not Positions• Interests define the problem• How to identify interests – Ask "Why?“, "Why not?" – Realize that each side has multiple interests – The most powerful interests: basic human needs• Talk about interests – Make your interests come alive: be specific – Acknowledge their interests as part of the problem – Put the problem before your answer – Look forward, not back – Be concrete but flexible – Be hard on the problem, soft on the people
3. Invent OPTIONS for Mutual Gain• DIAGNOSIS: 4 major obstacles – Premature judgment – Searching for the single answer – The assumption of a fixed pie – Thinking that "solving their problem is their problem.“• PRESCRIPTION – Invent first, decide later – Broaden options – Search for mutual gains – Make their decisions easy
Conduct Brainstorming• Before brainstorming – Define your purpose – Choose a few participants – Change the environment – Design an informal atmosphere – Choose a facilitator• During brainstorming – Seat the participants side by facing the problem – Clarify the ground rules, including the no-criticism rule – Brainstorm – Record the ideas in full view• After brainstorming – Star the most promising ideas – Invent improvements for promising ideas – Set up a time to evaluate ideas and decide• Consider brainstorming with the other side
Broaden options• Circle charts• Look through the eyes of different experts• Invent agreements of different strengths• Change the scope of a proposed agreement
Look for mutual gain• Identify shared interests• Dovetail differing interests• Ask for their preferences
Make their decision easy• Whose shoes? Focus on one person• What decision? Give an easy decision• Make offers, consider consequences
4. Insist on using Objective CRITERIA• Commit to reaching a solution based on principles• Develop objective criteria – Fair standards: market value, scientific judgment, professional standards, moral standards, tradition… – Fair procedures: “one cuts, the other chooses”, “taking turns”, “drawing lots”, “letting someone else decide”…• Negotiate with objective criteria – Frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria – Reason and be open to reason – Never yield to pressure, only to principle
Yes, But…• What if they are more powerful?• What if they won’t play?• What if they use dirty tricks?
1. What if they are more powerful?• Negotiate on merits, develop your BATNA to increase your negotiating power• 2 Objectives – Protect you against making an agreement you should reject – Make the most of the assets you do have• How – The cost of using a bottom line – Develop your BATNA – Judge every offer against your BATNA – Consider of exposing our BATNA – Consider the other side’s BATNA – Formulate a trip wire
2. What If They Won’t Play?• Center on what you do – principled negotiation• Focus on what they may do – negotiation jujitsu• Focus on what a third party can do – one-text procedure
Negotiation Jujitsu• Do not push back – sidestep their attack and deflect it against the problem – Treat their position as an option, ask for reason behind – Invite criticism and advices on your ideas – Recast an attack on you as an attack on the problem – Use questions instead of statements – Use silence
One-text procedure• Use of mediator• Mediator works with 2 sides, prepare drafts from their interests until no more improvements can be made, provide the final one-text, leave option of Yes and No to related parties
3. What if they use dirty tricks?• Recognize the tactic• Raise the issue explicitly• Question the tactic’s legitimacy and desirability• Use principled negotiation: people, interest, options and objective criteria• Turn to your BATNA and walk out as last resort• Don’t be a victim: be prepared to fight dirty bargaining tactics
Some common tricky tactics• Deliberate deception: phony facts, ambiguous authority, dubious intentions• Psychological warfare – Stressful situations – Personal attacks – The good-guy/bad-guy – Threats
Common tricky tactics (cont.)• Positional pressure tactics – Refusal to negotiate: talk about their refusal to negotiate, insist on using principles – Extreme demands: ask for principled justification of their position until it looks ridiculous even to them – Escalating demands: call it to their attention, take a break, insist on principles – Lock-in tactics: depends on communication -> interrupt the communication – Hardhearted partner: get agreement to the principles involved in writing, speak directly with the “hardhearted” partner – A calculated delay: look for objective conditions that can be used to establish deadlines – “Take it or leave it”: consider ignoring it first, introduce more solutions, if you use this tactic, let them know what they will have to lose if no agreement is reached and look for a face-saving way
• You knew it all the time• Learn from doing• “Winning”
Take-away Slide• Principled Negotiation – People: Separate the people from the problem – Interests: Focus on interests, not positions – Options: Invent options for mutual gain – Criteria: Insist on using objective criteria• Develop your BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Alternative) to increase negotiating power• Don’t be a victim of dirty bargain tricks
10 Frequent Questions1. Does positional bargaining ever make sense?2. What if the other side believes in a different standard of fairness?3. Should I be fair if I don’t have to be?4. What do I do if the people are the problem?5. When does it make sense NOT to negotiate?6. How should I adjust my negotiating approach to account for differences of personality, gender, culture and so on?7. How do I decide things like: where should we meet? Who should make the first offer? How high should I start?8. Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments?9. How do I try out these ideas without taking too much risk?10. Can the way I negotiate really make a difference, if the other side is more powerful? How to I enhance my “negotiating power”?