Session 3.2 Principled Negotiation
Total Session Time: 1 hours, 45 minutes (1 hour for lecture/discussion,
45 minutes for learning activities)
Learning Objectives:
By the end of this session, participants will be able to:
 Define negotiation.
 Identify three criteria for assessing the effectiveness of a negotiation method.
 Describe the four principles of negotiation on the merits.
 Describe strategies for overcoming common barriers to principled negotiation.
Slide 1
Introduction



The material in this session is
drawn primarily from a classic
negotiation guide, called “Getting
to Yes: Negotiating Agreement
Without Giving In” by Roger Fisher
and William Ury.
The book has been around for many
years, but Fisher and Ury’s
approach to negotiation continues to
be widely used today. We will be
exploring their philosophy of
principled negotiation.
For more information, a brief
summary of the book by Tanya
Glaser can be found online at:
http://www.beyondintractability.org/
booksummary/10204/?nid=5381
Source:
Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of
Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement
Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and
William Ury.” Beyond Intractability.
Conflict Research Consortium,
University of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado, USA.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
335
Slide 2
Slide 3
Animation Clicks: 1
Source:
Wikipedia. Negotiation. Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negotiation
Slide 4
Animation Clicks: 1
Introduction to Negotiation
Negotiation can happen at any time, in
many sorts of relationships.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Source:
Wikipedia. Negotiation. Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negotiation
Participant Handbook
336
Slide 5
•
•
•
•
•
•
When we are thinking about
negotiation, it is important to start at
the very beginning.
We can view our work environment
and personal life in two key ways:
as competitive, or as cooperative.
Of course, there will be some
scenarios where competition occurs
– in sports, in bidding for grants or
contracts, etc.
However, in most of our day-to-day
work and interactions, we strive for
cooperation and collaboration over
competition.
Why is this important to
negotiation? It is important because
successful negotiation almost
always begins with cooperation
between the parties present.
Successful negotiation begins with
cooperation, not competition.
Source:
Covey, Steven. 2004. The 7 Habits of
Highly Effective People. New York:
Free Press/Simon & Schuster.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
337
Slide 6
•
•
•
Notes continued here:
Lose/Win
• This mentality has no standards, demands,
expectations or vision.
• This line of thinking is quick to appease and
capitulate.
• It is easily intimidated, and very vulnerable to
other parties who are approaching negotiation
from a “win/lose” philosophy.
• Lose/Win can often breed resentment from the
losing party over time.
Lose/Lose
• Lose/lose is the philosophy of war – it is
adversarial conflict that sees the other party as
an enemy.
• This approach is vindictive, focused on “getting
even” or “getting back.”
• It does serious damage to relationships.
No Deal
• It is a “way out” to “save face”
• No one wins, no one loses
Source:
Covey, Steven. 2004. The 7 Habits of Highly
Effective People. New York: Free Press/Simon &
Schuster.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
•
We will discuss a few key
approaches to negotiation later in
this session; however, we’d like to
start with some basic philosophies
about approaches to negotiation or
conflict resolution.
We can think about the underlying
philosophies of negotiation in four
key ways: Win/Win, Win/Lose,
Lose/Win, and Lose/Lose.
There are situations in which each
of these may be appropriate;
however, in most cases the win/win
approach is the only viable option
to produce sustainable agreements
without damaging relationships.
In the long run, if it isn’t a win for
both parties, both parties lose.
Win/Win
• Win/win is an approach that seeks
mutual benefit to all parties.
• It is a cooperative approach, based
on the idea that one person’s
success is not achieved at the
expense or exclusion of the success
of other people.
Win/Lose
• Authoritarian – If I get my way, you
don’t get yours.
• Use position, power, credentials,
possessions, or personality to get
their way
• There is a place for win/lose
thinking in very competitive and
low-trust situations; however, most
of life is not competitive, and this
mentality can do damage to our
relationships.
CONTINUED in left-hand column
Participant Handbook
338
Slide 7
•
•
Win/win is a cooperative frame of
mind.
When we approach negotiation
from this mindset – that all parties
can work together to find shared
solutions and mutual benefit – we
will have more success.
Slide 8
Source:
Covey, Steven. 2004. The 7 Habits of
Highly Effective People. New York:
Free Press/Simon & Schuster.
•
•
•
•
Negotiation occurs at two levels.
Substance involves the “what” of
the negotiation.
Process involves the “how.”
All parties to a negotiation must
engage at both levels.
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
339
Slide 9
Animation Clicks: 1
•
•
•
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin. Page 4.
•
There are many different
approaches, philosophies, and
methods of negotiating – but not all
of them are truly effective.
As we learned in the previous slide,
different philosophies of negotiation
(such as win/lose) can be damaging
to relationships, and increase
conflict rather than resolving
conflict.
When considering different
methods or approaches to
negotiation, it is very important to
assess whether a method will be
effective at achieving your desired
results.
Effective negotiation produces wise
agreements in an efficient manner,
and the negotiation process does not
damage the relationship between
the parties.
Why are relationships important?
• Most negotiation occurs with
people, organizations, and other
entities that you will have a long,
ongoing relationship with.
• If negotiation is handled poorly, or
done in a way that is not effective, it
can damage these key relationships
that are the foundation of the work
that we do together.
Why is it important to have an efficient
process?
• It is in most people’s interest to
have productive negotiations.
• Any negotiation will take some
time, but some types of negotiation
lend themselves to more efficient,
cooperative use of time than others.
What is a wise agreement?
• We’ll discuss this in the next slide.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
340
Slide 10
•
•
So – what makes a wise agreement?
A wise agreement meets the
legitimate interests of all sides,
resolves conflict fairly, is
sustainable, and considers the
context of the agreement (including
community and stakeholder
interests.)
Slide 11
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Page 4.
• There are three phases in any
negotiation: analysis, planning, and
discussion.
Notes continued here:
Discussion
• Parties communicate back and forth
• Acknowledge and address any differences in
perception, feelings of anger or frustration, and
communication difficulties
• Work to understand the interests of each other
• Jointly generate options that are mutually
beneficial
• Seek agreement on objective standards for
resolving differences in interests or opinions.
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin. Page 14.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Analysis
• Diagnose the situation and the
problem - gather information,
organize it, think about it
• Consider the people – their
loyalties, perceptions, emotions,
communication styles
• Identify interests – yours and the
other parties’
• Take note of any criteria that could
be a basis of agreement
Planning
• Determine approaches to the
negotiation
• Prioritize your interests
• Identify realistic objectives for
assessment
• Generate additional options and
ideas for potential
agreements/solutions
• Decide how you want to handle any
“people problems” related to
perception, emotion, or
communication
CONTINUED in left-hand column
Participant Handbook
341
Using the Principled Negotiation Method
Slide 12
•
•
Most approaches to negotiation fall
into one of two categories:
positional bargaining and principled
negotiation.
We will learn more about each type
in the following slides.
Slide 13
Refer to Handout 3.2.1: Positional
Bargaining vs. Principled Negotiation
on page 353 of Participant Handbook.
•
•
•
•
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
•
•
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Positional Bargaining is the
“traditional approach” to
negotiation.
Positional bargaining views
negotiation as a win or lose game.
In positional bargaining each part
opens with their position on an
issue.
The parties then bargain from their
separate opening positions to agree
on one position.
o Haggling over a price is a
typical example of positional
bargaining.
Either positional bargaining
approach – soft or hard – does not
meet the three criteria for effective
negotiation.
The more extreme the opening
position and the smaller the
concessions, the more time and
effort it takes to reach agreement.
Participant Handbook
342
Slide 14
•
•
•
•
•
Principled Negotiation is also called
“negotiation on the merits.” It relies
on four key principles.
Principled negotiation offers a
different “game” than positional
bargaining, where parties are more
likely to negotiate effectively.
Principled negotiation is based in a
win/win philosophy, seeking mutual
benefit and shared solutions through
the negotiation process.
There are four key principles in
principled negotiation.
Consider and offer opportunities
for mutual gain.
o What would be a “win” for you,
and what would be a “win” for
them? Where is there common
ground?
Sources:
Covey, 2004. Page 233.
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
343
Slide 15
Refer to Handout 3.2.2: Using the
Method of Principled Negotiation on
pages 355-358 of Participant
Handbook.
Look at (1) Separate the People from
the Problem.
•
•
•
•
•
•
It is difficult to deal with a problem
without people misunderstanding
each other, getting angry or upset,
or taking things personally.
Remember that parties to a
negotiation are people first. They
have feelings, emotions, opinions,
cultures, backgrounds, etc. – and so
do you.
You must be sensitive to other
people involved to have a principled
negotiation that does not damage
your relationship.
Don’t let the relationship become
entangled with the problem.
You can achieve this by considering
perception, communication, and
emotion when dealing with other
people in a negotiation process.
Remember: without
communication, there is no
negotiation. Negotiation is a process
of back and forth – it requires
listening and speaking.
Sources:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of
Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement
Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and
William Ury.” Beyond Intractability.
Conflict Research Consortium,
University of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado, USA.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
344
Slide 16
Refer to Handout 3.2.2: Using the
Method of Principled Negotiation.
Look at (2) Focus on Interests.
•
•
•
Sources:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger
Fisher and William Ury.”
Beyond Intractability. Conflict Research
Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado, USA.
•
Good agreements focus on the
parties' interests, rather than their
positions.
Interests are the silent motivations
behind positions such as needs,
desires, concerns, and fears of each
side.
Defining a problem in terms of
positions means that at least one
party will “lose” the dispute.
When a problem is defined in terms
of the parties’ underlying interests it
is often possible to find a solution
which satisfies both parties’
interests.
Identify the parties’ interests regarding
the issue at hand.
• Ask why they hold the positions
they do, and consider why they
don't hold some other possible
position.
• Each party usually has a number of
different interests underlying their
positions, and interests may differ
somewhat among the individual
members of each side.
Discuss interests together, with all
parties present.
• If a party wants the other side to
take their interests into account, that
party must explain their interests
clearly.
• You will be more motivated to take
their interests into account if they
show you that they are paying
attention to your interests, and vice
versa.
• Parties should keep a clear focus on
their interests, but remain open to
different proposals and positions.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
345
Slide 17
Refer to Handout 3.2.2: Using the
Method of Principled Negotiation.
Look at (3) Generate a variety of
options before settling on an
agreement.
Notes continued here:
Make the other party’s decision easy.
• Each side should try to make proposals that are
appealing to the other side, and that the other
side would find easy to agree to.
• It is important to identify the decision makers,
and target proposals directly toward them.
• Proposals are easier to agree to when they seem
legitimate, or when they are supported by
precedent. Threats are usually less effective at
motivating agreement than are beneficial offers.
Sources:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of Getting to Yes:
Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger
Fisher and William Ury.” Beyond Intractability.
Conflict Research Consortium, University of
Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Separate the invention process from
the evaluation and decision stage.
• Let creative idea-generation happen
without pressure of decisionmaking.
• The parties should brainstorm
independently and also together in
an informal atmosphere and
brainstorm for all possible solutions
to the problem.
• All ideas should be written down
during a brainstorm.
Broaden your options.
• Brainstorming sessions can be made
more creative and productive by
encouraging the parties to shift
between four types of thinking:
stating the problem, analyzing the
problem, considering general
approaches, and considering
specific actions.
• Evaluation should start with the
most promising proposals. The
parties may also refine and improve
proposals at this point.
Focus on shared interests, and avoid
the win-lose approach.
• When the parties’ interests differ,
they should seek options in which
those differences can be made
compatible or even complementary.
• The key to reconciling different
interests is to “look for items that
are of low cost to you and high
benefit to them, and vice versa.”
(Fisher and Ury, page 79)
CONTINUED in left-hand column
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
346
Slide 18
Refer to Handout 3.2.2: Using the
Method of Principled Negotiation.
Look at (4) Insist that the agreement
be based on objective criteria.
•
•
•
Objective criteria help all parties
answer the question, “If we had a
good outcome to these negotiations,
how would we know it?”
Decisions based on reasonable
standards make it easier for the
parties to agree and preserve their
good relationship.
You need to jointly determine which
criteria are best for your situation
and negotiation.
Slide 19
Sources:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of
Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement
Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and
William Ury.” Beyond Intractability.
Conflict Research Consortium,
University of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado, USA.
•
•
In principled negotiation, we aim
for win/win solutions.
This is a summary of the win-win
negotiation approach.
Source:
Covey, Steven. 2004. The 7 Habits of
Highly Effective People. New York:
Free Press/Simon & Schuster.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
347
Slide 20
•
•
•
Notes continue here:
•
Use your team as a sounding-board – work together
to identify your interests, and begin brainstorming
possible agreements. Determine your best
alternative to a negotiated agreement (we will
discuss in greater detail later).
Determine goals and process with other parties.
• Before negotiating the substance, you should jointly
develop parameters for the process.
• What are our goals for this negotiation, goals for the
relationship, and goals for the substance?
• What ground rules do we want to govern these
negotiations?
• If we had a good outcome to these negotiations,
how would we know it?
• What key elements must our written agreement
address?
• Once the parties have cleared away the process
issues, then you are ready to focus on the substance.
Source:
Tyler-Wood, Irma. “Managing Complex
Negotiations: A Matter of Process Design.” Ki
Thought Bridge.
•
Preparing to negotiate includes
finding the right people, and
agreeing about the process.
Remember that we have the power
to negotiate the process of the
negotiation, as well as the
substance. We do not have to accept
the process that is “traditional” or
that we have used in the past!
Substantive negotiation should only
take place after people have
developed a common vocabulary,
skills and tools for conducting the
negotiation.
In complex negotiations, give as
much attention to the process of
how you negotiate as you do to the
substance what you want to achieve
in the negotiations.
Selecting the Team
Select the right people to be at the
negotiating table.
Consider the following questions:
• What expertise/experience will we
need?
• What relationships and history do
we need?
• What data and research will be
needed?
• What message will the other parties
be likely to draw from the
composition of our team?
• What authority and clout do we
need to bring to the negotiating
table in order to be credible?
• Who is available?
• Do we need all of these people at
the table all of the time, or only at
certain critical points in the
negotiation?
Develop your team.
• Clarify roles, responsibilities,
decision-making protocols and
communication channels within the
team.
• Make sure your team understands
the goals for the negotiations.
CONTINUED in left-hand column
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
348
Slide 21
Slide 22
You cannot make a wise decision about
whether to accept a negotiated
agreement unless you know what your
alternatives are.
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Spangler, Brad. 2003. “Best Alternative
to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA.)”
Beyond Intractability. Conflict
Research Consortium, University of
Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
• Before a negotiation, it is important
to determine your BATNA. This
involves three steps.
• Ask yourself: “What are my options
if we do not reach an agreement?”
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Spangler, Brad. 2003. “Best Alternative
to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA.)”
Beyond Intractability. Conflict
Research Consortium, University of
Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
349
Slide 23
Animation Clicks: 1
Refer to Handout 3.2.3: Overcoming
Barriers to Principled Negotiation on
pages 359-362 of Participant
Handbook.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
There are some barriers that are
likely to occur when negotiating.
They make a negotiation more
difficult, but they can be addressed
with a variety of tactics.
Power dynamics – when the other
party is more powerful
o Concentrate on your BATNA –
you also have power to walk
away.
Dealing with a party that insists on
positional bargaining, and refuses
principled negotiation
o Work to keep the party focused
on the problem.
o Do not respond to positional
bargaining.
o Use a third party as a facilitator
Dealing with a party that uses
“tricks” to deceive or pressure you
o Raise the issue, and establish
procedural rules
People problems – when people are
defensive, reactive, and emotional,
and you disagree
o Focus on the working
relationship, and do not match
their bad behaviour.
Differences in culture, gender,
personality, etc. come into play and
affect relationships or negotiation
o Be as sensitive to the other party
as you can by listening, and
avoiding assumptions and
stereotypes.
Participant Handbook
350
Slide 24
•
•
Principled negotiation is an
excellent method to employ;
however, it takes practice and skill
to do it well.
It is a good idea to practice these
techniques before you implement
them in a high-stakes situation.
Source:
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to
Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Page 175.
Slide 25
Animation Clicks: 1
Activity: Principled Negotiation Scenario
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Refer to Worksheet 3.2.1: Principled
Negotiation Scenario for instructions
on the scenario on page 363 of
Participant Handbook.
Follow instructions provided by the
facilitator
Participant Handbook
351
Slide 26
Key Points
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
352
Handout 3.2.1: Positional Bargaining vs. Principled Negotiation


Positional bargaining sets up a negotiation as a game of win or lose. If you do not like the
choice between hard or soft positional bargaining, you can change the game.
Principled negotiation changes the game, and allows parties to negotiate on the merits,
based on interests and objective criteria.
Characteristics of each approach are described below.

Soft
Positional Bargaining
Participants are friends.




Hard
Positional Bargaining
Participants are adversaries.

Goal is agreement.

Goal is victory.




Demand concessions as a
condition of the relationship.
Be hard on the people, hard
on the problem.
Distrust others
Dig in to your position.



Make concessions to
cultivate the relationship.
Soft on the people, soft on
the problem.
Trust others.
Change your position easily.

Make offers.

Make threats.

Goal is a wise outcome,
reached efficiently and in a
friendly, cooperative
manner.
Separate the people from the
problem.
Be soft on the people, hard
on the problem
Proceed independent of trust
Focus on interests, not
positions.
Explore interests.

Disclose your bottom line.


Avoid having a bottom line.

Accept one-sided losses to
reach agreement.
Search for the single answer:
the one answer they will
accept.
Insist on agreement.


Create/invent options for
mutual gain.
Develop multiple options to
choose from; decide later.

Mislead about your bottom
line.
Demand one-sided gains as
the price of agreement.
Search for the single answer:
the one answer you will
accept.
Insist on your position.

Try to avoid a contest of
will.

Try to win a contest of will.


Yield to pressure.

Apply pressure.











Principled
Negotiation
Participants are problemsolvers.
Insist on using objective
criteria.
Try to reach a result based
on standards, independent of
will.
Yield to principle, not to
pressure. Reason, and be
open to reason.
Source: Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin. Page 13.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
353
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
354
Handout 3.2.2: Using the Method of Principled Negotiation
Four Principles of
Negotiation on the Merits
(1) Separate the people from the problem
(2) Focus on interests, rather than positions
(3) Generate a variety of options before settling on an agreement
(4) Insist that the agreement be based on objective criteria.
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.
(1) Separate the People from the Problem





In this method of negotiation, it is critical to separate the people from the issues.
People tend to become personally involved with the issues and with their side’s positions.
Separating the people from the issues allows the parties to address the issues without
damaging their relationship. It also helps them to get a clearer view of the substantive
problem.
Generally the best way to deal with “people problems” is to prevent them from arising.
These problems are less likely to come up if the parties have a good relationship, and
think of each other as partners in negotiation rather than as adversaries.
People Problems: There are three basic types of “people problems” in negotiation:
perception, emotion, and communication.
o Perception





Most conflicts are based in differing interpretations of the facts, it is crucial for
both sides to understand the other's viewpoint.
Try to put yourself in the other party’s place.
Do not blame the other side for the problem – blaming is counter-productive, and
makes the other side feel resistant, defensive, and inflexible.
Try to make proposals that will appeal to the other side.
The more that the parties are involved in the process, the more likely they are to
be involved in and to support the outcome. Agreement becomes much easier if all
parties feel some ownership over the ideas.
o Emotion







Negotiation can be a frustrating process, and people often react with fear or anger
when they feel that their interests are threatened.
The first step in dealing with emotions is to acknowledge them, and to try to
understand their source.
Recognize that emotions are present – theirs and yours.
Do not dismiss others’ feelings, even if they seem unreasonable to you.
The parties must allow the other side to express their emotions.
Do not react emotionally to emotional outbursts.
Symbolic gestures such as apologies or an expression of sympathy can help to
defuse strong emotions, when appropriate.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
355
o Communication








Remember: without communication, there is no negotiation. Negotiation is a
process of back and forth – it requires listening and speaking.
Even when the parties are speaking to each other and are listening,
misunderstandings may occur.
Speak in a way that the other party can understand.
Listen carefully, actively, and attentively to what all parties are saying.
Give the speaker your full attention, and occasionally summarize the speaker’s
points to confirm your understanding.
Remember that understanding the other's case does not mean agreeing with it.
Speakers should direct their speech toward the other parties and keep focused on
what they are trying to communicate.
Each side should avoid blaming or attacking the other, and should speak about
themselves.
(2) Focus on Interests








Good agreements focus on the parties' interests, rather than their positions.
“Your position is something you have decided upon. Your interests are what caused you
to so decide.” Fisher & Ury, page 42
Defining a problem in terms of positions means that at least one party will “lose” the
dispute.
When a problem is defined in terms of the parties’ underlying interests it is often possible
to find a solution which satisfies both parties’ interests.
Interests define the problem. The problem is not conflict of positions, but a conflict
between the needs, desires, concerns, and fears of each party.
Interests motivate people – they are the silent motivations behind positions.
Interests are more flexible than positions. Frequently, parties have shared and compatible
interests alongside the conflicting ones.
The most powerful interests are basic human needs – don’t overlook them. These include
security, economic well-being, sense of belonging, recognition, and a sense of control
over your life. Money is not the only interest involved for most people.
 Identify the parties’ interests regarding the issue at hand.
o Ask “why?” and “why not?”. Try to learn why they hold the positions they do, and
consider why they don't hold some other possible position.
o Each party usually has a number of different interests underlying their positions, and
interests may differ somewhat among the individual members of each side. However,
all people will share certain basic interests or needs, such as the need for security and
economic well-being.
 Discuss interests together, with all parties present.
o If a party wants the other side to take their interests into account, that party must
explain their interests clearly.
o The other side will be more motivated to take those interests into account if the first
party shows that they are paying attention to the other side's interests.
o Discussions should look forward to the desired solution, rather than focusing on past
events.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
356
o Parties should keep a clear focus on their interests, but remain open to different
proposals and positions.
(3) Generate a variety of options before settling on an agreement

There are four main obstacles to generating creative options for solving a problem.
o Parties may decide prematurely on an option and so fail to consider alternatives.
o Parties may be intent on narrowing their options to find one single answer.
o Parties may define the problem in win-lose terms, assuming that the only options are
for one side to win and the other to lose.
o A party may decide that it is up to the other side to come up with a solution to the
problem.

There are four techniques for overcoming these obstacles and generating creative options.
o Separate the invention process from the evaluation and decision stage.



Let creative idea-generation happen without pressure of decision-making.
The parties should brainstorm independently, and also together in an informal
atmosphere and brainstorm for all possible solutions to the problem. Wild and
creative proposals are encouraged.
All ideas should be written down during a brainstorm.
o Broaden your options.




Brainstorming sessions can be made more creative and productive by encouraging
the parties to shift between four types of thinking: stating the problem, analyzing
the problem, considering general approaches, and considering specific actions.
Parties may suggest partial solutions to the problem.
Only after a variety of proposals have been made should the group turn to
evaluating the ideas.
Evaluation should start with the most promising proposals. The parties may also
refine and improve proposals at this point.
o Focus on shared interests, and avoid the win-lose approach.


When the parties’ interests differ, they should seek options in which those
differences can be made compatible or even complementary.
The key to reconciling different interests is to “look for items that are of low cost
to you and high benefit to them, and vice versa.” (Fisher and Ury, page 79)
o Make the other party’s decision easy.



Each side should try to make proposals that are appealing to the other side, and
that the other side would find easy to agree to.
It is important to identify the decision makers, and target proposals directly
toward them.
Proposals are easier to agree to when they seem legitimate, or when they are
supported by precedent. Threats are usually less effective at motivating agreement
than are beneficial offers.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
357
(4) Insist that the agreement be based on objective criteria.


Decisions based on reasonable standards make it easier for the parties to agree and
preserve their good relationship.
When interests are directly opposed, the parties should use objective criteria to resolve
their differences.
o Allowing such differences to spark a battle of wills will destroy relationships, is
inefficient, and is not likely to produce wise agreements.
 Develop objective criteria.
o Usually there are a number of different criteria which could be used. The parties must
agree which criteria are best for their situation.
o Criteria should be both legitimate and practical.
 Scientific findings, professional standards, or legal precedent are possible sources
of objective criteria.
o One way to test for objectivity is to ask if both sides would agree to be bound by those
standards.
o Rather than agreeing in substantive criteria, the parties may create a fair procedure for
resolving their dispute (i.e., procedural criteria).
 Approach each issue as a shared search for objective criteria.
o Ask for the reasoning behind the other party's suggestions. Using the other parties’
reasoning to support your own position can be a powerful way to negotiate.
 Keep an open mind.
o Each party must be open-minded, reasonable, and be willing to reconsider their
positions when there is reason to.
 Do not give in to pressure, threats, or bribes.
o When the other party stubbornly refuses to be reasonable, the first party may shift the
discussion from a search for substantive criteria to a search for procedural criteria.
Adapted from:
 Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger
Fisher and William Ury.” Beyond Intractability. Ed. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research
Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA. Available at:
http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10204/
 Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
358
Handout 3.2.3: Overcoming Barriers to Principled Negotiation
This handout suggests some ways to overcome common barriers in using principled
negotiation:
 When the other party is more powerful
 When the other party won’t use principled negotiation
 When the other party uses tricks
 When the people are the problem
 When differences in culture, gender, background, etc. are at play
I. Power Dynamics: When the Other Party Is More Powerful


No negotiation method can completely overcome differences in power. However, there
are ways to protect the weaker party against a poor agreement, and to help the weaker
party make the most of their assets.
Often negotiators will establish a “bottom line” in an attempt to protect themselves
against a poor agreement.
o The bottom line is what the party anticipates as the worst acceptable outcome.
o Negotiators decide in advance of actual negotiations to reject any proposal below that
line.
o However, you do not have to use the “bottom line” approach.
o Because the bottom line figure is decided upon in advance of discussions, the figure
may be arbitrary or unrealistic.
o Committing in advance to a rigid bottom line also prevents creativity in generating
options.
 Concentrate on your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)
o Remember that “the reason you negotiate is to produce something better than the
results you can obtain without negotiating.” (Fisher and Ury, page 100)
o You cannot make a wise decision about whether to accept a negotiated agreement
unless you know what your alternatives are.
o Your BATNA is the only standard which can protect you both from accepting terms
that are too unfavourable and from rejecting terms it would be in your interest to
accept.
 If the proposed agreement is better than your BATNA, then you should accept it.
 If the agreement is not better than your BATNA, then you should reopen
negotiations.
 If you cannot improve the agreement, then you should at least consider
withdrawing from the negotiations and pursuing your alternative (though the costs
of doing that must be considered as well).
o Without a clear idea of their BATNA, a party is simply negotiating blindly. The
BATNA is also key to making the most of existing assets.
o Power in a negotiation comes from the ability to walk away from negotiations.
 Thus the party with the best BATNA is the more powerful party in the
negotiation.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
359

Generally, the weaker party can take unilateral steps to improve their alternatives
to negotiation.

They must identify potential opportunities and take steps to further develop those
opportunities.
The weaker party will have a better understanding of the negotiation context if they also
try to estimate the other side’s BATNA.

 Determining your BATNA
o Develop a list of actions you might conceivably take if no agreement is reached.
o Improve some of the more promising ideas and convert them into practical options.
o Select, tentatively, the one option that seems best.
II. When the Other Party Won't Use Principled Negotiation


Sometimes the other side refuses to budge from their positions, makes personal attacks,
seeks only to maximize their own gains, and generally refuses to partake in principled
negotiations.
There are three approaches for dealing with opponents who are stuck in positional
bargaining.
 Continue to use the principled approach.
o This approach is often contagious.
 Refuse to respond in kind to their positional bargaining.
o When the other side attacks, the principles party should not counter attack, but should
deflect the attack back onto the problem.
o Positional bargainers usually attack either by asserting their position, or by attacking
the other side's ideas or people.
o When they assert their position, respond by asking for the reasons behind that
position.
o When they attack the other side's ideas, the principle party should take it as
constructive criticism and invite further feedback and advice.
o Personal attacks should be recast as attacks on the problem.
o Generally the principled party should use questions and strategic silences to draw the
other party out.
 Use a neutral third party, and the one-text approach.
o In this approach a third party is brought in.
o The third party should interview each side separately to determine what their
underlying interests are.
o The third party then assembles a list of their interests and asks each side for their
comments and criticisms of the list.
o She/he then takes those comments and draws up a proposal.
o The proposal is given to the parties for comments, redrafted, and returned again for
more comments.
o This process continues until the third party feels that no further improvements can be
made. At that point, the parties must decide whether to accept the refined proposal or
to abandon negotiations.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
360
III. When the Other Party Uses Dirty Tricks


Sometimes parties will use unethical or unpleasant tricks in an attempt to gain an
advantage in negotiations such as good guy/bad guy routines, uncomfortable seating, and
leaking information to other parties.
The best way to respond to such tricky tactics is to explicitly raise the issue in
negotiations, and to engage in principled negotiation to establish procedural ground rules
for the negotiation.

There are a variety of tricks that people might use:
o Deliberate deception about the facts, their authority, or their intentions.
 The best way to protect against being deceived is to seek verification the other
side's claims.
 It may help to ask them for further clarification of a claim, or to put the claim in
writing.
 However, in doing this it is very important not to be seen as calling the other party
a liar; that is, as making a personal attack.
o Engaging in psychological warfare.
 When the tricky party uses a stressful environment, the principled party should
identify the problematic element and suggest a more comfortable or fair change.
 Subtle personal attacks can be made less effective simply be recognizing them for
what they are.
 Explicitly identifying them to the offending party will often put an end to suck
attacks.
 Threats are a way to apply psychological pressure. The principled negotiator
should ignore them where possible, or undertake principled negotiations on the
use of threats in the proceedings.
o Using positional pressure tactics to attempt to structure negotiations so that only
one side can make concessions.
 The tricky side may refuse to negotiate, hoping to use their entry into negotiations
as a bargaining chip, or they may open with extreme demands.
 The principled negotiator should recognize this as a bargaining tactic, and look
into their interests in refusing to negotiate.
 They may escalate their demands for every concession they make.
 The principled negotiator should explicitly identify this tactic to the participants,
and give the parties a chance to consider whether they want to continue
negotiations under such conditions.
 Parties may try to make irrevocable commitments to certain positions, or to maketake-it-or-leave-it offers.
 The principled party may decline to recognize the commitment or the finality of
the offer, instead treating them as proposals or expressed interests. Insist that any
proposals be evaluated on their merits, and don't hesitate to point out dirty tricks.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
361
IV. When the people are the problem


People problems often require more attention than substantive ones.
Humans have a tendency to be reactive, defensive, and emotional. These dynamics can
cause negotiation to fail.
 Build a working relationship independent of agreement or disagreement.
o A good working relationship can cope with differences.
o The more seriously you disagree with someone, the more important it is to deal well
with that disagreement.
o You need to separate substantive issues from relationship and process issues.
o Generally, the approach of making concessions to appease the other side does not
work.
 Negotiate the relationship.
o Raise your concerns about their behaviour, and discuss as you would any other
element of the negotiation.
 Do not match their bad behaviour.
o You should work to model the behaviour that you would like to see.
V. When Differences in Culture, Gender, Personality, etc. are at play


Differences in culture, gender, background, personality, etc. can affect negotiation.
It is often important to navigate our similarities and differences when we negotiate with others.
 Get in step.
o
o
o
Be sensitive to the values, perceptions, concerns, norms of behavior, and mood of the other
people.
Try to get “in step” with that person’s way of thinking.
Consider the following:
 Pacing of speech
 Level of Formality – highly formal? Informal?
 Preference for oral or written agreements
 Scope of relationships (business, other?)
 Status and culture
 Avoid stereotyping and making assumptions.
o
o
o
Making assumptions about someone based on their group characteristics is insulting and
risky.
Do not make assumptions such as, “all Americans do it this way,” or “women are bad at
negotiating.”
Question your assumptions and be open to learning.
 Listen actively.
Adapted from:

Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and
William Ury.” Beyond Intractability. Ed. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of
Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA. Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10204/

Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Spangler, Brad. 2003. “Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA.)” Beyond Intractability. Ed. Guy
Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA. Available
at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/batna/?nid=1027
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
362
Worksheet 3.2.1: Principled Negotiation Scenario
Notes:
• In this activity, we will work from a similar scenario that we used in Session 3.1, to
practice persuasive communication.
Scenario:
• Imagine that we are all colleagues at a particular health training institution.
• A generous development partner has approached the principal of your health training
institution with a grant opportunity.
• Your institution has the opportunity to receive a grant of Tsch 5,000,000 to do a capital
improvement project for your institution.
• Your principal has placed you on a “task force” to determine how this grant will be
used. Your task force includes colleagues within your institution.
• Together, you must reach agreement about how this grant will be used.
•
•
•
Remember - a capital improvement grant can be used to improve the facility and its
infrastructure. This might include renovating a building, purchasing new equipment,
building something, conducting repairs, etc.
This task force includes the director, a student, a tutor, a librarian, and a clinical teaching
instructor.
You should assume that the grant cannot be divided between projects – it must be used
for a specific purpose, such as purchasing furniture, creating a dormitory, etc.
Instructions:
You will be assigned one of the roles below:
• Number 1: Principal
• Number 2: Student
• Number 3: Tutor
• Number 4: Clinical Teaching Instructor
• Number 5: Librarian
• Form small groups that include one of each role. (Each group should have numbers 1-5
represented.)


You will have 5 minutes to plan your negotiation individually. Remember that there are
multiple parties present!
o What is the problem or issue that you are most concerned about?
(For example: crowded classrooms, no computers, no projectors, cramped
dormitories, poor living quarters, etc.)
o Who are the people involved? How do they perceive this problem?
o What are your interests/motivations?
o What are solutions that are agreeable to you? What is your BATNA?
o What problem in the institution is the highest priority for you?
You will have 20 minutes to discuss, negotiate, and try to reach an agreement in your
small group.
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
363
Sources/Bibliography:
Refer to these materials for additional background reading, as needed.





Covey, Steven. 2004. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Free
Press/Simon & Schuster.
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. 1991. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Glaser, Tanya. “Book Summary of Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In by Roger Fisher and William Ury.” Beyond Intractability. Ed. Guy Burgess and
Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado, USA.
Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10204/
Spangler, Brad. 2003. “Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA.)” Beyond
Intractability. Ed. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium,
University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/batna/?nid=1027
Tyler-Wood, Irma. “Managing Complex Negotiations: A Matter of Process Design.” Ki
ThoughtBridge. Available at:
http://www.kithoughtbridge.com/pages/203_managing_complex_negotiations_a_matter_
of_process_design.cfm
Leadership and Management Course
Session 3.2: Principled Negotiation
Participant Handbook
364