Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In

you are negotiating with them even if you are not talking with them. The question is whether to do so at a distance by actions and words (such as “We will never negotiate with terrorists!”) or whether to do so more directly. In general, the better the communication, the better your chance to exert influence.

peer group; role, the desire to have a meaningful purpose; and status, the desire to feel fairly seen and acknowledged. Trampling on these interests tends to generate strong negative emotions. Attending to them can build rapport and a positive climate for problem-solving negotiation.[1]

Let’s say you represent an association of teachers striking for higher pay and for seniority as the only criterion in layoffs. The school board has proposed a $2,000 raise across the board plus retention of the right to decide unilaterally who gets laid off. Mine their position for the interests that lie below the surface. “What exactly are the bud

If you want someone to listen and understand your reasoning, give your interests and reasoning first and your conclusions or proposals later.

Frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria. Reason and be open to reason as to which standards are most appropriate and how they should be applied. Never yield to pressure, only to principle.

Good listening can increase your negotiation power by increasing the information you have about the other side’s interests or about possible options. Once you understand the other side’s feelings and concerns, you can begin to address them, to explore areas of agreement and disagreement, and to develop useful ways to proceed in the future. Consider

However difficult personal relations may be between us, you and I become better able to reach an amicable reconciliation of our various interests when we accept that task as a shared problem and face it jointly.

Principled negotiation produces wise agreements amicably and efficiently. The more you bring standards of fairness, efficiency, or scientific merit to bear on your particular problem, the more likely you are to produce a final package that is wise and fair. The more you and the other side refer to precedent and community practice, the greater your

you pay attention and interrupt occasionally to say, “Did I understand correctly that you are saying that . . . ?” the other side will realize that they are not just killing time, not just going through a routine.