CHAPTER 1

DONT BARGAIN OVER POSITIONS

3 Criteria for Judging Method of Negotiation

Should produce a wise agreement, if possible
Should be efficient
Should improve or at least not damage the

relationship between parties

Taking Positions
It tells other side what you want
Provides anchor in an uncertain and pressured

situation
It can eventually produce the terms of acceptable

agreement
Fails to meet the basic criteria of producing a wise
agreement, efficiently and amicably

Arguing over positions produces unwise

agreements
Negotiators tend to lock themselves into positions
Interest in saving face
Less likely that any agreement will wisely

reconcile the parties original interests

Result frequently an agreement less satisfactory

than it could have been

Arguing over positions in efficient

Creates incentives that stall settlement
Starting

with

extreme

position,

stubbornly

holding it, deceiving the other party and giving

small concessions
Interfere in reaching a settlement promptly

Time & Cost increases to reach agreement along

with risk of no agreement

Arguing over position endangers an ongoing

relationship
Contest of will
Task of jointly devising an acceptable solution

tends to become a battle

Results in anger and resentment

Multiple players positional bargaining

is even worse
The more people involved, the more serious the

drawbacks to positional bargaining

United Nations conferences is an ideal example
Formation of coalitions between parties (the

north, the south, etc.)

Being NICE is no answer

Rather than emphasizing a goal of victory, they

emphasize the necessity of reaching agreement

Soft negotiation game standard moves
Make offers and concessions
Trust other side
Be friendly
Yield to avoid confrontation

Two styles of Positional Bargaining

Soft

Hard

Participants are friends

The goal is agreement
Make concessions to cultivate the

Participants are adversaries

The goal is victory
Demand concessions as a condition of
the relationship
Be hard on the problem and the people
Distrust others
Dig into your position
Make offers
Mislead as to your bottom line
Demand one-side gains as the price of
agreement
Search for the single answer: the one you
will accept
Insist on your position
Try to win a contest of will
Apply pressure

relationship
Be soft on the people and the problem
Trust others
Change your position early
Make threats
Disclose your bottom line
Accept one-side losses to reach
agreement
Search for the single answer: the one
they will accept
Insist on agreement
Try to avoid a contest of will
Yield to pressure

There is an alternative Principled

Negotiation
Negotiation takes place at two levels:
Negotiation addresses the substance
It focuses usually implicit on the procedure

for dealing with the substance (meta-game)

3 Stages of Principled Negotiation

Analysis

Stage:

diagnose

the

situation

(gather

information, organize it, and think about it)

Planning Stage: generate ideas and additional criteria for

deciding among options

Discussion Stage: generate options that are mutually

advantageous and seek agreement on objective standards

for resolving opposed interests

Alternative is principled negotiation or

negotiation on the merits
People

: Separate the people from the problem

Interests

: Focus on interests, not positions

Options

: Generate a variety of possibilities

before deciding what to do

Criteria

: Insist that the result be based on some

objective standard

Problem
Soft

Hard

Participants are friends

The goal is agreement
Make concessions to cultivate the

Participants are adversaries

The goal is victory
Demand concessions as a condition of
the relationship
Be hard on the problem and the people
Distrust others
Dig into your position
Make threats
Mislead as to your bottom line
Demand one-side gains as the price of
agreement
Search for the single answer: the one you
will accept
Insist on your position
Try to win a contest of will
Apply pressure

relationship
Be soft on the people and the problem
Trust others
Change your position early
Make offers
Disclose your bottom line
Accept one-side losses to reach
agreement
Search for the single answer: the one
they will accept
Insist on agreement
Try to avoid a contest of will
Yield to pressure

Solution - Principled
Participants are Problem solvers
The goal is a wise outcome reached efficiently and

amicably
Separate the people from the
problem
Be soft on the people, hard on the
problem
Proceed independent of trust

Insist on using objective criteria

Try to reach a result based on
standards independent of will
Reason and be open to reasons;
yield to principle , not pressure

Invent options for mutual gain

Develop multiple options to
choose from; decide later

Focus on interests, not positions

Explore interests
Avoid having a bottom line

Principled Negotiation
Wise Agreement Focus on Basic Interests, Mutually

Satisfying Options, and Fair Standards

Efficiently gradual consensus on a joint decision without

all the transactional costs

Amicable agreement separating people from problem

allows to deal directly and empathetically

CHAPTER 2
SEPERATE THE PEOPLE FROM THE PROBLEM

Basic Principles of Negotiation

Be soft on the people and hard on the problem
Proceed whether or not you trust your opponent

Negotiators are People First

Pros
Negotiation can have a psychological commitment to a mutually
satisfactory outcome
Can be a working relationship where trust, understanding,
respect, and friendship are built up over time can make each new
negotiation smoother and more efficient.

Cons
People get angry, depressed, fearful, hostile, frustrated, and
offended
They have egos that are easily threatened

Interests in Negotiation
Substantial
Relational

Most negotiations take place in the context of an ongoing

relationship where it is important to carry on each
negotiation in a way that will help rather than hinder future
relations and future negotiations

Relationship tends to become entangled

with the problem
Likely to treat people and problem as one
People draw from comments on substance unfounded

inferences which they then treat as facts about that

person's intentions and attitudes toward them
Positional bargaining puts relationship and substance

in conflict.
Separate the relationship from the substance; deal

directly with the people

Perception Problem
Understanding the other side's thinking is not

simply a useful activity that will help you solve

your problem.
Whether you are making a deal or settling a

dispute, differences are defined by the difference

between your thinking and theirs

Perception Problem
TENANTS PERCEPTIONS

LANDLADY'S PERCEPTIONS

The rent is already too high

The rent has not been increased for a

long time

With other costs going up, I can't

With other costs going up, I need more

afford to pay more for housing

rental income

The apartment needs painting

He has given that apartment heavy wear

and tear

I know people who pay less for a

I know people who pay more for a

comparable apartment

comparable apartment

Young people like me can't afford to

Young people like him tend to make

pay high rents

noise and to be hard on an apartment

Perception Problem
TENANTS PERCEPTIONS

LANDLADY'S PERCEPTIONS

The rent ought to be low because the

We landlords should raise rents in order

neighbourhood is rundown

to

improve

the

quality

of

the

neighborhood
I am a desirable tenant with no dogs

His hi-fi drives me crazy

or cats
I always pay the rent whenever she

He never pays the rent until I ask for it

asks for it
She is cold and distant; she never

I am a considerate person who never

asks me how things are

intrudes on a tenant's privacy

Perception
Put yourself in their Shoes
Discuss each other's perceptions
Look for opportunities to act inconsistently with
their perceptions
Perhaps the best way to change their perceptions
is to send them a message different from what
they expect

Perception
Give them a stake in the outcome by making sure
they participate in the process
Face-saving: Make your proposals consistent
with their values.

Emotion
In a negotiation, particularly in a bitter dispute, feelings may
be more important than talk
Emotions on one side will generate emotions on the other.
Fear may breed anger, and anger, fear
Emotions may quickly bring a negotiation to an impasse or
an end.
First recognize and understand emotions, theirs and yours
Make emotions explicit and acknowledge them as legitimate
Allow the other side to let off steam
Don't 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

Prevention Works Best

Build a Working Relationship

Face the problem, not the people.

CHAPTER 3
FOCUS ON INTERESTS, NOT POSITIONS

Interest Vs Positions
A wise solution reconcile interests, not positions
However, as problems appear to be a conflict of positions,

and since goal is to agree on a position, the parties tend to

think and talk about positions

Interests define the problem

The basic problem in a negotiation lies with each side's

needs, desires, concerns, and fears.

These desires and concerns are interests

Interest Vs Positions
Reconciling interests rather than positions works
because:
For every interest there usually exist several possible

positions that could satisfy it.

Alternative position
When you do look behind opposed positions for the

motivating interests, you can often find an alternative

position which meets not only your interests but theirs as
well.

Find Shared Interests

Behind opposed positions lie shared and compatible interests,
as well as conflicting ones:
It is assumed that because the other side's positions are opposed

to ours, their interests must also be opposed.

However, most often a close examination of the underlying

interests will reveal the existence of many more interests that are
shared or compatible than ones that are opposed
Shared interests and differing but complementary interests can

both serve as the building blocks for a wise agreement.

How to Identify Interests

Ask Why?
Put yourself in their shoes
Examine each position they take, and ask yourself "Why?

Ask "Why not?" Think about their choice

Identify the basic decision that the other side probably see you

asking for, and ask yourself why they have not made that
decision

Now analyze the consequences, as the other side would

probably see them, of agreeing or refusing to make the
decision you are asking for.

How to Identify Interests

Realize that each side has multiple interests

A common error in diagnosing a negotiating situation is to assume that each

person on the other side has the same interests which is almost never the
case

Identify influences

Thinking of negotiation as a two-person, two-sided affair can be easy, but it

should not blind you to the usual presence of other persons, other sides, and
other influences

How to Identify Interests

The most powerful interests are basic human needs
Security
Economic well-being
Sense of belonging
Recognition
Control over one's life

Make a list To sort out the various interests of each side, it

helps to write them down as they occur to you

How to Identify Interests

Talk about interests
The chance negotiating increases when you communicate them.

The other side may not know what your interests are, and you
may not know theirs

Make your interests come alive

Be specific. Concrete details not only make your description

credible, they add impact

Acknowledge their interests as part of the problem

If you want the other side to appreciate your interests, begin by

demonstrating that you appreciate theirs.

How to put Interests First

Put the problem before your answer
To make someone listen and understand your reasoning, give

your interests and reasoning first and your conclusions or

proposals later.

Look forward, not back

You will satisfy your interests better if you talk about where you

would like to go rather than about where you have come from.

Be concrete but flexible

Think in terms of more than one option that meets your

interests.

How to put Interests First

Be hard on the problem, soft on the people
Spend your aggressive energies in committing yourself to

your interests.
If people feel personally threatened by an attack on the

problem, they may grow defensive and may cease to

listen.
Give positive support to the human beings on the other

side equal in strength to the vigor with which you

emphasize the problem.
Successful negotiation requires being both firm and open.

CHAPTER 4
INVENT OPTIONS FOR MUTUAL GAINS

Diagnosis
Four major obstacles:
Premature judgment
Searching for the single answer
Assumption of fixed pie
Thinking that solving their problem is

their problem

Prescription
1. To separate the act of invention

options from the act of judging

them
2. To broaden the options on the table
rather than look for a single answer
3. To search for mutual gains
4. To invent ways of making their
decisions easy

Separate inventing from

deciding
Before brainstorming
Define your purpose
Choose a few participants
Change the environment
Design an Informal Atmosphere
Choose a facilitator

Separate inventing from

deciding
During brainstorming
Seat the participants side by facing the

problem
Clarify the ground rules
Brainstorm
Record the ideas in full view

Separate inventing from

deciding
After brainstorming
Star the most promising Ideas
Invent Improvements for promising Ideas
Set up a time to evaluate ideas and

decide

Second Major Block

Broaden your options
Multiply options by shutting between

specific and general: The circle chart

Look through the eyes of different
experts
Invent agreements of different strengths
Change the scope of a proposed
agreement

Invent Agreements of Different Strengths

Stronger

Weaker

Substansive

Precedural

Premanent

Provisional

Comprehensive

Partial

Final

In Principal

Unconditional

Contingent

Binding

Non Binding

First Order

Second Order

Third Major Block

Look for mutual gain
Identify Shared Interests
Dovetail differing interests
Ask for their preferences
Make their decision easy

Whose shoes
What decision
Making threats is not enough

CHAPTER 5
INSIST ON USING OBJECTIVE CRITERIA

Developing objective
criteria
How do you develop objective

criteria?
How do you use them in negotiation?
Fair Standards
Fair Procedures

Negotiating with objective

criteria
Frame each issue as a joint search

for objective criteria

Reason and be open to reason
Never yield to pressure

Points to ponder
What if they are more powerful?

(Develop BATNA)
What if they wont play? (Use
negotiation Jujitsu)
What if they use dirty tricks? (Taming
the hard bargainer)

What If They Are More Powerful? - Develop

Your BATNA
Know your BATNA well:
Your BATNA is the standard against which any proposed
agreement should be measured.
BATNA is a good measure and has the advantage of
being flexible enough to permit the exploration of
imaginative solutions.

The disadvantage of an unknown BATNA is you can

be too committed to reaching an agreement.

Negotiation Jujitsu
Don't defend your ideas, invite criticism and advice : Ask

the other party whats wrong with it

Recast an attack on you as an attack on the problem :

Resist the temptation to defend yourself against personal

attacks
Ask questions and pause : Use questions instead of

statements

What If They Use Dirty Tricks? Taming the

Hard Bargainer
There are many tactics and tricks people can use to try to
take advantage of you which range from lies and
psychological abuse to illegal, unethical, or simply
unpleasant pressure tactics.
Two kinds of typical response:
Standard response : To put up with it Might work or fail
Respond in kind : Might break off the negotiation

What If They Use Dirty Tricks? Taming the

Hard Bargainer
How to negotiate about the rules of the game:
know what is going on- spot particular ploys that indicate

deception
Discuss the tactic - Makes it less effective
Separate the people from the problem
Focus on interests, not positions
Invent options for mutual gain
Insist on using objective criteria

CHAPTER 6
WHAT IF THEY ARE MORE POWERFUL?

What If They Are More Powerful? - Develop

Your BATNA
Protect Yourself:
Do not be in a hurry to end it and be too accommodating

to the views of the other side - too quick to go along.

Establishing bottom-line Advantages(makes it easier to

resist pressure and temptations of the moment) and

disadvantages(reduces the incentive to invent a tailormade solution)

No method can guarantee success if all the leverage

lies on the other side.

What If They Are More Powerful? - Develop

Your BATNA
Know your BATNA well:
Your BATNA is the standard against which any proposed
agreement should be measured.
BATNA is a good measure and has the advantage of
being flexible enough to permit the exploration of
imaginative solutions.

The disadvantage of an unknown BATNA is you can

be too committed to reaching an agreement.

What If They Are More Powerful? - Develop

Your BATNA
Formulate a Trip Wire
A solution midway between the perfect solution and your BATNA.

Make the most of your assets

The better your BATNA, the greater your power
Generating possible BATNAs requires three distinct operations:
1) inventing a list of actions you might conceivably take if no
agreement is reached;
2) improving some of the more promising ideas and converting them
into practical alternatives; and
3) selecting, tentatively, the one option that seems best

Consider the other side's BATNA

CHAPTER 7

WHAT IF THEY WONT PLAY?

What If They Wont Play? Use Negotiation

Jujitsu
When the other side just states their position in unequivocal terms
and is not ready to listen to the merits and interests, there are three
basic approaches for focusing their attention on the merits:
What you can do : Concentrate on the merits yourself, rather than
on positions
What they can do : Direct their attention to the merits
Negotiation Jujitsu
What a third party can do : Consider including a third party
trained to focus the discussion on interests, options, and criteria

Negotiation Jujitsu
Do not end up playing the positional bargaining game by

criticizing and rejecting when the other side takes a firm position
Do not push back When they attack you, don't counterattack
Break the vicious cycle by refusing to react Instead of pushing

back, sidestep their attack and deflect it against the problem

Don't attack their position, look behind it : Treat it as one

possible option. Look for the interests behind it, seek out the
principles which it reflects, and think about ways to improve it

Negotiation Jujitsu
Don't defend your ideas, invite criticism and advice : Ask

the other party whats wrong with it

Recast an attack on you as an attack on the problem :

Resist the temptation to defend yourself against personal

attacks
Ask questions and pause : Use questions instead of

statements

CHAPTER 8

WHAT IF THEY USE DIRTY TRICKS?

What If They Use Dirty Tricks? Taming the

Hard Bargainer
There are many tactics and tricks people can use to try to
take advantage of you which range from lies and
psychological abuse to illegal, unethical, or simply
unpleasant pressure tactics.
Two kinds of typical response:
Standard response : To put up with it Might work or fail
Respond in kind : Might break off the negotiation

What If They Use Dirty Tricks? Taming the

Hard Bargainer
How to negotiate about the rules of the game:
know what is going on- spot particular ploys that indicate

deception
Discuss the tactic - Makes it less effective
Separate the people from the problem
Focus on interests, not positions
Invent options for mutual gain
Insist on using objective criteria

Some Common Tricky Tactics

Deliberate Deception : misrepresentation about facts, authority,
or intentions
Less than full disclosure is not the same as deception.

Psychological Warfare
Stressful situations : location of negotiation etc.
Personal attacks : Comments on appearance, intellect,
knowledge etc
The good-guy/bad-guy routine: Two people on the same side,
one acts tough and the other acts considerate
Threats

Some Common Tricky Tactics

Positional Pressure Tactics designed to structure the
situation so that only one side can effectively make concessions
Refusal to negotiate
Extreme demands
Escalating demands

Lock-in Tactics : Gambles which depend on communication

Hardhearted partner
A calculated delay
Take it or leave it