In this edition of the Mediation Network of North America blog, learn how to Separate People from the Problem in Negotiation and how you can improve your mediation skills with Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., J.D., Ph.D.
Negotiation is not just about the exchange of offers and counteroffers—it is also about human interaction. People bring emotions, biases, and personal experiences to the negotiation table, which can sometimes create unnecessary roadblocks. In Getting to Yes, Fisher, Ury, and Patton stress the importance of separating the people from the problem to ensure that negotiations remain constructive.
Chapter 2 of the book explores why relationship issues often derail negotiations and how negotiators can manage perception, emotion, and communication to stay focused on the actual problem. By recognizing these challenges and employing strategies to navigate them, negotiators can improve their ability to reach mutually beneficial agreements.
One of the most common pitfalls in negotiation is the tendency to personalize conflicts. Rather than focusing on the issue at hand, negotiators often view each other as adversaries. This mindset can escalate tensions, making it difficult to find common ground. The authors of Getting to Yes identify three key relationship barriers that can hinder negotiation success:
Perception is one of the most significant obstacles in negotiation. Each party comes to the table with its own experiences, assumptions, and interpretations of events. These perspectives shape how they see both the conflict and the other party.
Stereotyping: Assigning negative labels to the other party (e.g., “They’re just being greedy” or “They don’t care about fairness”) makes it harder to consider their point of view.
Attribution Bias: Assuming negative intentions behind the other party’s actions while justifying one’s own behavior.
Selective Perception: Focusing only on information that supports pre-existing beliefs while ignoring facts that contradict them.
Put yourself in the other party’s shoes. Try to understand their interests, motivations, and constraints.
Check assumptions. Ask questions instead of making conclusions about their intentions.
Frame issues neutrally. Avoid emotionally charged language that could put the other party on the defensive.
For example, if an employee is negotiating a raise, they might assume their employer undervalues them, while the employer might believe the employee lacks perspective on the company’s financial constraints. By clarifying perspectives and separating assumptions from reality, both sides can have a more productive conversation.
Negotiation is not purely logical—emotions play a significant role in how people approach conflict resolution. Fear, frustration, and anger can cloud judgment and make compromise more difficult. When emotions take over, negotiators may become defensive, aggressive, or completely disengaged.
Escalation of conflict: Emotional reactions can turn a small disagreement into a full-blown argument.
Reduced problem-solving ability: When people feel threatened, their ability to think creatively diminishes.
Damaged relationships: Harsh words or aggressive tactics can create long-term resentment, making future negotiations more difficult.
Acknowledge emotions rather than suppressing them. If someone is frustrated, recognizing their feelings can help de-escalate tension.
Take a break if necessary. Walking away for a few minutes can prevent emotional reactions from spiraling out of control.
Stay focused on interests rather than personal attacks. Redirect conversations to the problem instead of dwelling on blame.
For instance, in a business partnership dispute, one party may feel betrayed by the other’s actions. Rather than retaliating emotionally, a productive approach would be to acknowledge their feelings while steering the conversation toward possible solutions.
Poor communication is a frequent cause of negotiation failures. Misunderstandings, unclear messaging, and poor listening skills can lead to confusion and unnecessary conflict. When negotiators do not express their interests clearly or fail to actively listen, the likelihood of deadlock increases.
Talking past each other: Each party focuses on their own arguments without truly hearing the other side.
Interrupting or dominating the conversation: This can make the other party feel unheard and defensive.
Using vague or ambiguous language: If proposals are not clear, misunderstandings can arise.
Practice active listening. Repeat or summarize what the other party says to confirm understanding.
Ask open-ended questions. This encourages dialogue rather than shutting it down.
Speak with clarity and purpose. Avoid vague language and be direct about your interests.
For example, in a landlord-tenant dispute over a security deposit, a tenant might say, “You’re just trying to take my money!” while the landlord responds, “You’re being unreasonable!” A better communication approach would be:
Tenant: “I want to understand why the full deposit wasn’t returned. Can you explain?”
Landlord: “I deducted for repairs that were needed. Let’s go over the itemized charges together.”
This reframing keeps the focus on the issue rather than personal attacks.
To successfully separate the people from the problem, negotiators should:
Recognize and address perception biases. Consider the other party’s perspective and question assumptions.
Manage emotions constructively. Keep discussions calm and solutions-focused rather than allowing frustration to take over.
Communicate effectively. Listen actively, speak with clarity, and encourage dialogue.
A real-world example of this approach in action is international diplomacy. When countries negotiate peace treaties or trade agreements, emotions often run high, and historical grievances cloud discussions. By focusing on common interests—such as economic growth or regional stability—diplomats can shift the conversation away from personal animosities and toward mutually beneficial solutions.
Fisher and Ury’s principle of separating people from the problem is crucial for effective negotiation. By overcoming perception biases, managing emotions, and improving communication, negotiators can create a more constructive environment for resolving disputes. When people see each other as problem-solving partners rather than adversaries, negotiations become less about winning and losing and more about finding workable solutions.
By mastering these strategies, negotiators can turn even the most challenging conflicts into opportunities for collaboration and agreement. Whether in business, legal disputes, or personal relationships, separating the people from the problem is a fundamental step toward achieving better negotiation outcomes.
Are you ready to take your conflict resolution skills to the next level? Dr. Earwicker’s Professional Development Mediation Training offers a comprehensive, ADR Training Course designed to prepare you for the demands of contemporary mediation, in-person or online. Building on the expertise of Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., Ph.D., J.D., this Online Mediation Course equips you with the practical tools you need to resolve disputes effectively and ethically—whether in business, family, or community settings.
Dr. Earwicker’s curriculum is designed to build a strong foundation in Mediation Skills Training. By integrating theory with hands-on practice, you’ll develop critical competencies essential to a successful career in dispute resolution:
In this edition of the Mediation Network of North America blog, get an Introduction to Principled Negotiation and how you can improve your mediation skills with Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., J.D., Ph.D.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Negotiators often fall into the trap of seeing negotiations as zero-sum—if one side wins, the other must lose. However, this principle encourages creativity in finding win-win solutions. Strategies for generating options include:
Brainstorming together before committing to solutions.
Considering multiple alternatives rather than fixating on a single outcome.
Looking for trade-offs that allow both parties to maximize their benefits.
For example, in a business contract dispute, instead of arguing over a fixed price, the parties might explore alternative ways to add value, such as extended payment terms, service upgrades, or additional business partnerships. Expanding the range of possible solutions often reveals agreements that satisfy both parties more effectively than a simple compromise.
Many negotiations become mired in subjective opinions and power struggles. To prevent this, principled negotiation emphasizes the use of objective criteria—independent standards that both parties can agree upon. These might include:
Market value or industry benchmarks.
Legal standards and expert opinions.
Precedents or historical data.
For instance, in a salary negotiation, rather than debating what an employee “deserves,” both sides could refer to industry salary reports and job market trends to determine a fair compensation package. Using objective standards reduces conflict and makes agreements feel more legitimate to both parties.
By following these four principles, negotiators can achieve several key advantages:
Wiser outcomes. By focusing on interests and creative problem-solving, agreements tend to be more durable and satisfying.
Stronger relationships. Reducing adversarial tactics helps maintain goodwill and trust between parties.
Greater efficiency. Eliminating unnecessary posturing and concessions streamlines the negotiation process.
Ultimately, principled negotiation transforms conflict resolution from a battle into a collaborative effort. Rather than one side winning at the other’s expense, both parties work together to create value and find sustainable solutions.
Chapter 1 of Getting to Yes introduces a fundamental shift in negotiation thinking—one that moves away from rigid positions and toward interest-based, principled negotiation. By separating people from problems, focusing on interests, generating creative solutions, and using objective criteria, negotiators can resolve conflicts more effectively and equitably. Whether in business, personal relationships, or international diplomacy, these principles offer a framework for reaching agreements that work for all parties involved.
As the book unfolds, Fisher and Ury further explore how to implement these principles in real-world scenarios, providing practical strategies for overcoming obstacles and improving negotiation outcomes. By embracing principled negotiation, anyone can become a more skilled and successful negotiator—one who achieves better results without unnecessary conflict or compromise.
Are you ready to take your conflict resolution skills to the next level? Dr. Earwicker’s Professional Development Mediation Training offers a comprehensive, ADR Training Course designed to prepare you for the demands of contemporary mediation, in-person or online. Building on the expertise of Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., Ph.D., J.D., this Online Mediation Course equips you with the practical tools you need to resolve disputes effectively and ethically—whether in business, family, or community settings.
Dr. Earwicker’s curriculum is designed to build a strong foundation in Mediation Skills Training. By integrating theory with hands-on practice, you’ll develop critical competencies essential to a successful career in dispute resolution:
In this edition of the Mediation Network of North America blog, learn Why Positional Bargaining Fails and how you can improve your mediation skills with Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., J.D., Ph.D.
Negotiation is an integral part of life—whether we are closing a business deal, resolving a family dispute, or advocating for a cause. Yet, as Fisher, Ury, and Patton explain in Getting to Yes, most people instinctively approach negotiation with positional bargaining: staking out a fixed position and making concessions until a compromise is reached. In Chapters 1 and 2 of their seminal work, the authors break down the inefficiencies and pitfalls of this common approach, advocating instead for a method based on interests rather than positions.
Fisher and Ury outline two predominant styles of positional bargaining, each with its own drawbacks:
A “soft” negotiator prioritizes maintaining relationships over securing the best possible outcome. This approach is characterized by:
A tendency to avoid conflict at all costs.
Willingness to make concessions easily.
An emphasis on being fair and cooperative, often to the negotiator’s own detriment.
While this style fosters goodwill, it frequently leads to unbalanced agreements where one party gains disproportionately at the expense of the other. Moreover, it sets a precedent that can encourage exploitation—when one side is perceived as too willing to concede, the other may continue pushing for more.
At the other extreme, “hard” negotiators focus on winning at all costs. Their approach typically involves:
Setting high, rigid demands.
Using aggressive tactics to pressure the other party.
Making minimal or no concessions.
This method often results in deadlock or strained relationships. When both sides adopt a hard stance, the negotiation becomes a test of wills rather than a problem-solving exercise. Even if an agreement is reached, it may come at the cost of long-term collaboration and trust. The damage to relationships can be especially harmful in contexts where ongoing cooperation is necessary, such as workplace or diplomatic negotiations.
The authors argue that positional bargaining—whether soft or hard—tends to be inefficient, produces unwise outcomes, and jeopardizes relationships. Here’s why:
It Encourages Stubbornness Over Flexibility
When negotiators anchor themselves to fixed positions, they become less willing to consider alternative solutions. This rigidity stifles creativity and prevents both sides from exploring mutually beneficial options.
It Focuses on Positions Rather Than Interests
The essence of effective negotiation is understanding why each party wants what they want. Positions are often surface-level statements (e.g., “I need a 10% raise”), whereas interests reveal underlying motivations (e.g., “I need higher pay to afford childcare”). When parties focus solely on their stated positions, they miss opportunities to satisfy their true needs through alternative solutions.
It Wastes Time and Energy
When both sides dig in, negotiations can become protracted battles of attrition. Instead of working toward a resolution, the focus shifts to defending one’s stance and undermining the opponent’s. The longer a negotiation drags on, the more costly it becomes in terms of time, resources, and emotional strain.
It Harms Relationships
Hard bargaining creates adversarial dynamics, while soft bargaining fosters resentment from unfair compromises. Neither method builds the foundation for healthy, long-term partnerships. When negotiations end with one party feeling exploited or unsatisfied, future interactions are likely to be strained.
Rather than fixating on rigid positions, Fisher and Ury propose principled negotiation, which focuses on identifying and addressing underlying interests. The key principles include:
Separating the people from the problem – Avoid personal attacks and keep discussions focused on issues rather than personalities.
Focusing on interests, not positions – Dig deeper to understand why a party holds a certain stance and look for ways to meet those underlying needs.
Generating options for mutual gain – Brainstorm multiple possibilities before deciding on a final agreement.
Using objective criteria – Base decisions on fair standards (such as market value, legal precedent, or expert opinions) rather than power plays or subjective opinions.
By shifting from positional bargaining to an interest-based approach, negotiators can craft solutions that satisfy all parties, preserve relationships, and yield more durable agreements.
Fisher and Ury’s critique of positional bargaining serves as a compelling argument for a more thoughtful, interest-based approach to negotiation. Whether dealing with workplace conflicts, business deals, or personal disputes, moving beyond fixed positions and focusing on underlying interests allows for more effective, collaborative, and sustainable agreements. By applying these principles, negotiators can avoid unnecessary conflict, foster trust, and ultimately achieve better outcomes for all involved.
Are you ready to take your conflict resolution skills to the next level? Dr. Earwicker’s Professional Development Mediation Training offers a comprehensive, ADR Training Course designed to prepare you for the demands of contemporary mediation, in-person or online. Building on the expertise of Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., Ph.D., J.D., this Online Mediation Course equips you with the practical tools you need to resolve disputes effectively and ethically—whether in business, family, or community settings.
Dr. Earwicker’s curriculum is designed to build a strong foundation in Mediation Skills Training. By integrating theory with hands-on practice, you’ll develop critical competencies essential to a successful career in dispute resolution:
Start Your Journey to Becoming a Professional Mediator with Dr. Earwicker’s Roseville 40-Hour Basic Mediation Training Course. Learn conflict resolution, negotiation, and communication skills online and on-demand.
Explore a Preview: Get a Sneak Peek at Dr. Earwicker’s Roseville 40-Hour Basic Mediation Training Curriculum! Click the images to enlarge the previews or click here to view the entire course curriculum
Are you ready to take your conflict resolution skills to the next level? Dr. Earwicker’s Roseville 40-Hour Basic Mediation Training offers a comprehensive, ADR Training Course designed to prepare you for the demands of contemporary mediation, in-person or online. Building on the expertise of Dr. Ben Earwicker, M.Int.St., Ph.D., J.D., this Online Mediation Course equips you with the practical tools you need to resolve disputes effectively and ethically—whether in business, family, or community settings.
What Students are Saying
What stood out most to me in your approach was the way you integrated AI into the course. I thought that was ingenious. I’ve taken other mediation courses before and, frankly, many of them felt flat—they simply didn’t translate well into practice. Your use of AI, by contrast, added an immediacy and practicality that made the lessons come alive. It allowed me to apply what you were teaching contemporaneously, which was invaluable.
In this course, I have come to appreciate that mediation is more than simply managing disputes—it is about creating a safe and constructive space where people can be heard, respected, and guided toward resolution. The role-play simulations allowed me to put theory into practice and experience the challenge of balancing neutrality, empathy, and structure while facilitating difficult conversations.
I wasn't sure how an online training would work for this, but am pleasantly surprised at how effective this training was. I appreciate the time and effort you took to create it, as I would not have been able to receive such great training otherwise - my schedule prevented anything in person. Thank you for everything!
As a recent college grad, online classes have been something that I have oftentimes disliked just because of the difficulty of teaching through online lectures. These lectures bypassed many of my fears as they were incredibly informative and helpful. I enjoyed that the modules were laid out so that the exercises that were assigned made sense with the material we had been learning. I was also very impressed by the chat bot model for the exercises as they were surprisingly realistic.
This was a fantastic course with a variety of teaching modalities and thorough content to prepare me for the world of mediation. I am far more confident in my skills after the AI role-play practices and incorporating Dr. Earwicker's feedback after each assignment. Highly recommend!
Overall, I truly am impressed with the content of the course, and how it is flowing. I'm so impressed by the course :). Thank you, I look forward to what's left!
Even though I came in with no background in mediation, the course helped me feel well prepared. The ideas about interest-based communication and de-escalation really stuck with me and helped during the role-plays. I now see how these tools can apply not just in mediation, but in everyday situations too.
I like the way this course builds. You provide the information, confirm with quizzes, then allow for use of knowledge – role play. I also enjoy that each role-play has built on the material and itself. It has given me the opportunity to improve including my active listening, open ended questions, reframing, and making sure I stay neutral.
The lectures contained a great deal of depth into a wide range of material, and I appreciated the source references so that I can deepen further into the material. I would highly recommend this course to anyone seeking good mediation training.
This course has become an invaluable toolbox for me—not only in the context of mediating family law disputes, but also in transforming my overall approach to conflict
Ultimately, this course has helped me evolve from a problem-solver to a solution-facilitator, which I believe will make me not only a more effective attorney, but also a better communicator overall.
To be candid, when I began the class, I wasn’t terribly enthused. I thought it might be something I could shortcut my way through. In fact, it was quite the opposite. It required real effort—but I am better for it. Revisiting the fundamentals of the mediation process was refreshing, and I plan to read Getting to Yes because of your recommendation. I see its application not only in mediation, but in negotiation and everyday life.
One of the most eye-opening aspects of this course has been the exploration of implicit and explicit bias. These concepts have challenged me to reflect on my own assumptions and behaviors, and how they may inadvertently affect my interactions with clients, colleagues, and opposing counsel.
This course has become an incredibly enjoyable and enriching experience. Each module builds upon the last, and the tools I’ve gained—especially those related to planning strategies for a successful mediation practice—are proving to be invaluable in both academic and personal contexts. The practical applications of these strategies have started to influence how I approach conflict resolution in my daily life, making me more thoughtful, intentional, and effective in my interactions.
Ultimately, this course is helping me evolve from a culturally aware attorney to a culturally responsive one. It is not enough to be familiar with different cultures; I must also be intentional in how I engage with them.
Complete Dr. Earwicker’s Online Mediation Course at your own speed.
Get direct support from Dr. Earwicker, multiple times in each module, throughout the course.
Stay current with the latest in Conflict Resolution Training and negotiation techniques. Utilize Dr. Earwicker’s innovative AI-assisted role-play scenarios for hands-on experience mediating.
Dr. Earwicker’s program stands out because he has tailored his Mediation Certification Training to professionals looking to establish or enhance a private mediation practice, government mediators, and attorneys seeking to add mediation to their legal repertoire.
Combining real-world role-plays, interactive modules, and expert-led instruction, Dr. Earwicker’s course ensures you gain the confidence and competency required to thrive as a mediation professional. Unlike other offerings, our Mediator Certification Online pathway provides flexible scheduling and personalized support, so you can learn at your own pace while receiving individual, direct feedback from Dr. Earwicker throughout your course.
Dr. Earwicker’s curriculum is designed to build a strong foundation in Mediation Skills Training. By integrating theory with hands-on practice, you’ll develop critical competencies essential to a successful career in dispute resolution:
Yes! This course provides the foundational skills needed to start a mediation practice, including conflict resolution techniques, negotiation strategies, and ethical considerations. Many mediators begin by offering services independently or contracting with courts, businesses, or law firms. We also provide guidance on business development.
Yes! Dr. Earwicker's self-paced online training allows you to complete the course on your schedule from anywhere. The course includes video lectures, interactive exercises, and real-world case studies to ensure an engaging learning experience.
Absolutely! Once you successfully complete the training and assessments, you will receive a certificate of completion that verifies you have met the Roseville 40-Hour mediation training standard. This can be used to apply for mediator rosters and private practice opportunities.
Dr. Earwicker's course meets the widely accepted Roseville 40-Hour training requirement for mediation certification in most states and jurisdictions. Send us a request using the form below to check your specific state or local jurisdiction.
No prior legal or counseling background is required! Our course is designed for professionals from all industries who want to develop mediation skills. Many successful mediators come from business, human resources, education, social work, and law.
Mediators work in court systems, private practice, corporations, HR departments, family law, and community dispute resolution. With this training, you can launch your own mediation business or contract with established mediation programs. Demand for mediation is growing as courts and businesses seek cost-effective conflict resolution methods.
While this is a self-paced course, you’ll receive direct, personal feedback from Dr. Earwicker in two or three assignments for each of the course's 10 modules. This allows you to engage with Dr. Earwicker at every stage of your course.
The course covers essential mediation skills, including: active listening, negotiation techniques, handling difficult conversations, neutrality and ethics, cultural competency, and mediation process stages (from opening statements to agreement drafting).
Dr. Earwicker's course stands out because it is designed for professionals looking to build a private practice, from government mediators to counselors and attorneys, and more. The course goes beyond basic mediation skills and includes real-world role-play scenarios to prepare you for success in private practice.
Call or Text Ben directly at (208) 440-5973
Dr. Earwicker’s Mediator Certification Online format allows you to study at your convenience. Get your mediation certificate in as few as 5 days, on your schedule:
