Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (Summary)
Two sisters are fighting over the last orange in the kitchen. They argue back and forth until they begrudgingly agree to cut it in half. One sister squeezes her half for a meager amount of juice and throws the peel away. The other grates her half for a meager amount of zest for a cake and throws the fruit away. They both lost. If they had only asked why the other wanted the orange, they would have discovered one wanted all the juice and the other wanted all the peel—a perfect, win-win outcome they completely missed.
Separate the People from the Problem
Negotiators are people first. Their emotions, egos, and different perceptions can become entangled with the substance of the negotiation. To succeed, you must deal with the 'people problems' directly and work together to attack the issue, not each other.
A landlord and tenant are arguing over a broken thermostat. Instead of accusing each other of greed or neglect, they should reframe it as a shared problem: 'How can we ensure the apartment is properly heated in a way that is fair to both of us?' This turns them from adversaries into collaborative problem-solvers.
Focus on Interests, Not Positions
Your stated position is what you want ('I want a raise'). Your interest is the underlying reason why ('I want to be recognized for my contributions'). Arguing over positions leads to deadlock; exploring interests leads to creative solutions.
Egypt and Israel fought over the Sinai Peninsula. Israel's position was to keep part of the Sinai. Egypt's position was to regain full sovereignty. Their underlying interests were different: Israel wanted security, while Egypt wanted sovereignty. The solution was to return the entire peninsula to Egypt but demilitarize it, satisfying both nations' core interests.
Invent Options for Mutual Gain
Don't assume you're fighting over a fixed pie. In the heat of negotiation, people rarely take time to brainstorm creative possibilities. You should dedicate time to generating a wide array of options before making any decisions.
A company wants to buy a plot of land from an individual who doesn't want to sell. Instead of just haggling over price (a win-lose scenario), they could brainstorm options. What if the company leased the land? What if the seller was given a small equity stake in the new building? What if they were offered a job in the new development? These options expand the pie beyond a simple cash transaction.
Insist on Using Objective Criteria
To avoid a pure battle of wills, base the result on some fair, independent standard. This could be market value, scientific judgment, professional standards, or legal precedent. It makes the agreement feel fair and reduces resentment.
When deciding on the price for a house, instead of just throwing numbers back and forth, the buyer and seller could agree to use objective criteria. For instance, they could average the price of three independent appraisals or use the price-per-square-foot of other recently sold homes in the neighborhood.
