A Better Way to Negotiate: An Introduction to Principled Negotiation
Negotiation is often seen as a tug-of-war between two opposing sides, each trying to pull the other closer to their position. However, as Fisher, Ury, and Patton highlight in Getting to Yes, there is a more effective approach—one that moves beyond rigid positions to focus on mutual interests and problem-solving. This approach, known as Principled Negotiation, is designed to produce wise agreements, preserve relationships, and improve negotiation efficiency.
The Problems with Positional Bargaining
Before diving into the principles of principled negotiation, it is important to understand why traditional positional bargaining often leads to suboptimal results. As outlined in Chapter 1 of Getting to Yes, positional bargaining—whether soft or hard—has inherent flaws:
It encourages stubbornness. When parties take rigid positions, they become less willing to explore alternative solutions that could better meet their needs.
It leads to inefficient negotiations. The back-and-forth process of making incremental concessions can be time-consuming and exhausting.
It strains relationships. Hard bargaining creates adversarial interactions, while soft bargaining can leave one party feeling exploited.
It overlooks underlying interests. Positional bargaining focuses on stated demands rather than the real motivations behind them, often missing opportunities for creative solutions.
Given these limitations, Fisher and Ury propose a more effective framework for negotiation—one that shifts the focus from positions to principles.
What Is Principled Negotiation?
Principled negotiation is a method that emphasizes mutual problem-solving over competitive haggling. It is built on four core principles, each designed to make negotiations more constructive, efficient, and fair.
1. Separate the People from the Problem
Negotiations often become emotionally charged, with parties viewing each other as obstacles rather than partners in problem-solving. This principle encourages negotiators to:
Distinguish personal relationships from the substantive issues at hand.
Acknowledge emotions and perceptions, while keeping discussions focused on objective concerns.
Use active listening to demonstrate understanding and defuse hostility.
For example, consider a workplace conflict where an employee demands a raise and their manager refuses. Rather than treating the situation as a battle of wills, both sides should explore why the employee feels underpaid—perhaps they believe their contributions are undervalued. By addressing concerns about recognition and career growth, rather than focusing solely on salary figures, the parties can work toward a solution that satisfies both sides.
2. Focus on Interests, Not Positions
A position is a stated demand (e.g., “I need a $10,000 raise”), while an interest is the underlying reason behind the demand (e.g., “I want financial stability and recognition for my contributions”). Effective negotiation requires looking beyond surface-level positions to uncover shared and differing interests.
To illustrate this point, imagine two roommates arguing over whether to keep a window open or closed. One insists on keeping it open for fresh air, while the other wants it closed to avoid a draft. A position-based negotiation might result in one person “winning” while the other is dissatisfied. An interest-based approach, however, reveals that the first roommate values ventilation while the second values warmth. A possible solution? Keeping the window open slightly while using a space heater—an outcome that satisfies both parties’ interests.