Getting to Yes

Getting to Yes

1. What If They Are More Powerful?

   • In response to power, the most any method of negotiation can do is to meet two objectives: first, to protect you against making an agreement you should reject and second, to help you make the most of the assets you do have so that any agreement you reach will satisfy your interests as well as possible
     • Protecting yourself
       • About failing to reach agreement on an important business deal in which you have invested a great deal of yourself. Under these conditions, a major danger is that you will be too accommodating to the views of the other side
     • The cost of using a bottom line.
       • If you are buying, a bottom line is the highest price you would pay. If you are selling, a bottom line is the lowest amount you would accept.
       • If there is more than one person on your side, jointly adopting a bottom line helps to ensure that no one will indicate to the other side that you might settle for less.
       • But the protection afforded by adopting a bottom line involves high costs. It limits your ability to benefit from what you learn during negotiation.
       • A bottom line also inhibits imagination. It reduces the incentive to invent a tailor-made solution which would reconcile differing interests in a way more advantageous for both you and them. Almost every negotiation involves more than one variable.
     • The insecurity of an unknown BATNA
       • If you have not thought carefully about what you will do if you fail to reach an agreement, you are negotiating with your eyes closed.
         • In most circumstances, however, the greater danger is that you are too committed to reaching agreement. Not having developed any alternative to a negotiated solution, you are 52 unduly pessimistic about what would happen if negotiations broke off.
         • One frequent mistake is psychologically to see your alternatives in the aggregate.
     • Formulate a trip wire.
       • Although your BATNA is the true measure by which you should judge any proposed agreement, you may want another test as well. In order to give you early warning that the content of a possible agreement is beginning to run the risk of being too unattractive, it is useful to identify one far from perfect agreement that is better than your BATNA.
   • Making the most of your assets
     • Protecting yourself against bad agreement is one thing. Making the most of the assets you have in order to produce a good agreement is another.
   • The better your BATNA, the greater your power
     • People think of negotiating power as being determined by resources like wealth, political connections, physical strength, friends, and military might. In fact, the relative negotiating power of two parties depends primarily upon how attractive to each is the option of not reaching agreement.
   • Develop your BATNA
     • Vigorous exploration of what you will do if you do not reach agreement can greatly strengthen your hand. Attractive alternatives are not just sitting there waiting for you; you usually have to develop them.
   • Consider the other side's BATNA
     • You should also think about the alternatives to a negotiated agreement available to the other side. They may be unduly optimistic about what they can do if no agreement is reached. Perhaps they have a vague notion that they have a great many options and are under the influence of their cumulative total
   • When the other side is powerful
     • Having a good BATNA can help you negotiate on the merits. You can convert such resources as you have into effective negotiating power by developing and improving your BATNA

2. What If They Won't Play?

   • Talking about interests, options, and standards may be a wise, efficient, and amicable game, but what if the other side won't play? While you try to discuss interests, they may state their position in unequivocal terms.
     • Negotiation jujitsu
       • If the other side announces a firm position, you may be tempted to criticize and reject it. If they criticize your proposal, you may be tempted to defend it and dig yourself in. If they attack you, you may be tempted to defend yourself and counterattack
     • Don't attack their position, look behind it
       • Assume every position they take is a genuine attempt to address the basic concerns of each side; ask them how they think it addresses the problem at hand. Treat their position as one option and objectively examine the extent to which it meets the interests of each party, or might be improved to do so.
     • Don't defend your ideas, invite criticism and advice
       • A lot of time in negotiation is spent criticizing. Rather than resisting the other side's criticism, invite it. Instead of asking them to accept or reject an idea, ask them what's wrong with it Examine their negative judgments to find out their underlying interests and to improve your ideas from their point of view
     • Recast an attack on you as an attack on the problem
       • When the other side attacks you personally — as frequently happens — resist the temptation to defend yourself or to attack them. Instead, sit back and allow them to let off steam. Listen to them, show you understand what they are saying, and when they have finished, recast their attack on you as an attack on the problem.
     • Ask questions and pause
       • Those engaged in negotiation jujitsu use two key tools. The first is to use questions instead of statements. Statements generate resistance, whereas questions generate answers. Questions allow the other side to get their points across and let you understand them
     • Consider the one-text procedure:
       • You will probably call in a third party only if your own efforts to shift the game from positional bargaining to principled negotiation have failed