"Negotiation 101"

Although there are no hard and fast rules for negotiation, there are four foundational principles designed to increase the likelihood of success. ⁽⁵⁾ They apply in any situation of negotiation; with children, spouses, business partners, superiors, direct reports, clients, colleagues, legislators and heads of state. When approaching a situation of simple negotiation between two parties, one person might suggest that they both read a basic negotiation book, such as Getting to Yes ⁽⁶⁾ before beginning.

1. Separate the people from the problem

In any conflict of consequence, people who are on opposite sides of the issues begin to have tension with each other, and may even find they are beginning to dislike a previously likeable associate. It is important to remember that the person you are having conflict with is not the problem. He or she shares a part of the problem, just as you do, but he or she is much more than the problem. One way to do this is to mentally put yourself on the same side of the table as the other person. Visualize both (or all) of you looking at the problem together, studying it, turning it over. Imagine yourself united with the other person to figure out a solution that benefits everyone, not just one side. Even though the other person may have a personality you find difficult to deal with, or feelings have been hurt, the situation will not improve by your focus on his or her unpleasant characteristics instead of the problem.

2. Use interest-based bargaining

This principle is perhaps the least understood, and yet it has the greatest potential for impact. When people begin to bargain for something, they typically focus on what they want, such as five hundred dollars, an apology or a surgical bill covered. This is called a position. People come to a decision about what they want based upon how well it satisfies a particular need. That need is called an interest. Our common experiences with negotiation are positional rather than interest-based. Think of the stereotype of the car salesman before the days of the fixed price offer. Negotiation occurred in a series of predictable steps, similar to a dance, with the salesman lowering the purchase price and the buyer increasing his/her offer incrementally. Very often an unwritten rule creeps in suggesting that the ultimate ending point is splitting the difference.

Consider for a moment a hypothetical interest-based negotiation. The buyer might say that he or she is interested in a car that satisfies the need to maintain a certain level of car payment, that it fits his image of being a "sporty type", and that it should be dependable and easy to maintain. The salesman might say that he needs to spend less than three hours on this transaction as well as meet his company's expectation that they receive at least $1000 over the sticker price to cover its cost and his commission.

How much simpler transactions would be if people felt they could be express their needs rather than their positions. Interest-based negotiation offers greater freedom and flexibility because more solutions can emerge to address the interests. Focusing on one position essentially focuses on one prescribed solution, stifling the creativity needed to explore other, more satisfying solutions. Interest-based negotiation is also more time efficient, because parties can get right to the heart of what is important to them.

Table 3. Positions versus interests

POSITIONS	INTERESTS
I demand one million dollars!	I need to have future medical bills paid.
Give me a raise or I'm out of here.	I need to be respected and feel important.
Your documentation needs to comply with the Cancer Center's standards.	It is important that I be able to understand what exactly you did for our patients so I can continue the care you started.
I want to be comfortable with the care you provide for our patients.	The care that each of us provides needs to contribute to the desired outcomes for our patients, instead of creating obstacles.

3. Invent options for mutual gain

When approaching the other person in negotiation, it is common for both parties to simply respond to each other's offers or position. "You want $500? I'll give you $350." A better approach would be first to discuss the interests both of you are trying to satisfy. You may want immediate cash, and not to prolong receiving money. Perhaps the other person will accept a little less because he wants the process to be over with. In selling the computer desk, you discover that the buyer really has no means of getting it home. She may be willing to pay $50 more if you will deliver it. And maybe you are willing to accept payments over three months instead of all at once. You know the buyer. She works with you and you trust that she will meet her obligations to you. In inventing options for mutual gain, first identify each other's interests or needs. Then consider options that will satisfy the interests of all sides instead of simply one. Or if a solution can only meet one party's needs, add an additional component to satisfy the other's.

4. Determine the criteria for success

Before beginning a negotiation think about how you will know if it is a success. Will a certain position have to be met? Do you both have to agree that the negotiation is fair? Will you have to try on an ongoing arrangement for two months to see how it impacts your schedule? Thinking about evaluation criteria in advance helps to make sure that it is a well-designed negotiation, and if ongoing, will have a good chance of being followed through.

Endnotes

⁵ Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (2^nd ed). New York: Penguin Books.

⁶ Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (2^nd ed). New York: Penguin Books.