Tab 1
Q1. Explain with examples how principled negotiation is different from positional bargaining.
Positional bargaining
What it is: A negotiation style where each side takes a fixed stance and makes concessions to
reach a compromise. It's often a win-lose situation, where one party's gain is the other's loss.
Example: You want to buy a car for $18,000, and the seller insists on $22,000. You and the
seller argue back and forth, giving ground with each offer until you agree on a price of $20,000.
The focus is on who wins more of the difference between your initial positions.
Principled negotiation
What it is: An interest-based approach that seeks to create a mutually beneficial outcome by
focusing on the "why" behind each person's position. It follows four principles:
Separate the people from the problem: Address emotions and personalities separately from the
issue.
Focus on interests, not positions: Dig into the underlying needs, fears, and desires.
Invent options for mutual gain: Brainstorm multiple solutions that could satisfy both parties.
Insist on using objective criteria: Base the agreement on fair standards, not just willpower.
Example: In the same car purchase scenario, instead of focusing solely on the price, you and
the seller discuss your interests. You might explain your need to stay within a specific budget,
while the seller might explain the need to cover their monthly payments or make a certain profit
margin. You could then generate options beyond just the price, such as including a maintenance
package, an extended warranty, or a better trade-in value for your old car, and agree on a price
that uses an objective standard like the market value for that model and year.
Q2. Identify at least one negotiation tactic you may have used recently and explain how useful it
has been.
gemini
Principled negotiation, also known as negotiation on the merits, is a superior alternative to
positional bargaining because it transforms negotiation from a confrontational contest of wills
into a collaborative process of joint problem-solving.
1. Positional Bargaining: The Pitfalls
Positional bargaining is the traditional form of negotiation where each side takes a rigid
position, argues for it, and makes incremental concessions to meet somewhere in the
middle. The book outlines several critical flaws in this approach:
Flaw Description Example
Inefficient The process is a slow dance of Two parties negotiating a salary
moving from extreme opening spend weeks exchanging offers that
positions to a middle ground, are only marginally different,
requiring time spent on bluffing, prolonging the hiring process
misleading, and deciding when unnecessarily.
to make the next small
concession.
Endangers As negotiators dig into their A landlord and tenant argue heatedly
Relationships positions, they focus on winning over a $50 rent increase; the battle of
the argument, which can breed wills escalates, severely damaging
resentment, anger, and distrust, their goodwill, even if they reach a
often leading to a rupture in the compromise.
long-term relationship.
Produces The final agreement is often a Two sisters arguing over a single
Unwise mechanical split-the-difference orange decide to cut it in half. They
Outcomes compromise rather than a satisfy their position (getting half the
solution that optimally satisfies orange) but fail to realize one needed
the underlying needs of both the peel for a cake (interest) and the
parties. other needed the juice for a drink
(interest).
2. Principled Negotiation: The Four Pillars
Principled negotiation is a method designed to resolve disputes based on fair standards,
independent of the will of either side, while being "hard on the merits, soft on the people."
It is guided by four fundamental principles:
Principle Focus and Tactic Contrast with Positional
Bargaining
People Separate the people from the problem. Positional bargaining merges the
The goal is to focus squarely on the issue person with their position, making
at hand, not the emotions or personalities personal ego and face-saving the
involved. central issue.
Interests Focus on interests, not positions. Look Positional bargaining focuses
beyond what people say they want (their solely on stated positions (e.g., "I
position) to determine why they want it must have $50,000"), which locks
(their underlying interests, needs, fears, people into demands.
and desires).
Options Generate a variety of possibilities Positional bargaining moves
before deciding what to do (Invent immediately to judgment, trying to
options for mutual gain). Brainstorm narrow the gap between positions
creative solutions that expand the pie without considering alternatives
before entering the critical judgment that benefit both sides.
phase.
Criteria Insist that the result be based on some Positional bargaining relies on
objective standard. The agreement sheer will and persistence ("I won't
should be measured against a fair, move unless you do"), making the
independent benchmark like market value, final outcome dependent on who is
scientific standards, or precedent. more stubborn.
Detailed Example: A Construction Contract Dispute
● Positional Bargaining: A homeowner Position: "I will pay only $10,000 for the
completed deck." The builder Position: "I must have $15,000." The negotiation
becomes a slugfest over the $5,000 difference, threatening their relationship.
● Principled Negotiation:
○ People: They first acknowledge the stress and separate the emotions from the
question of the deck's fair value.
○ Interests: They focus on interests. The builder's Interest is to cover the
unexpected cost of premium wood and maintain a fair profit. The homeowner's
Interest is to stick to the original budget and ensure the quality matches the
agreed-upon standards.
○ Options: They brainstorm (e.g., Use slightly less expensive but equally durable
wood on non-visible parts? Owner handles the staining to reduce labor cost?
Builder offers a 10% discount on future work?).
○ Criteria: They agree to consult objective criteria, such as local lumber yard
receipts and the prevailing labor rate for this type of work, to determine the fair
added cost, thus reaching a result based on independent legitimacy, not arbitrary
will.
Q2. Identify at least one negotiation tactic you may have
used recently and explain how useful it has been.
A powerful and fundamental tactic from principled negotiation is to Develop Your BATNA.
Tactic: Know Your BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) 🌟
The BATNA is a foundational concept. It is not just an alternative, but the best course of action
you can take if the current negotiation fails and you must walk away.
Utility and Usefulness
Developing a strong BATNA is the most crucial step you can take before and during a
negotiation, as it directly relates to your power:
1. Sets a Rational Walk-Away Point:
○ The BATNA prevents you from accepting a deal that is worse than what you
could achieve on your own. It acts as a protective floor for your negotiation. If
the proposed agreement is not better than your BATNA, you should decline the
offer.
2. It is the Source of Your Negotiation Power:
○ Contrary to popular belief, negotiation power does not come from status, wealth,
or a strong personality. Power comes from having a good BATNA. If you have
many attractive alternatives (a strong BATNA), you have less to lose from
walking away, which gives you significant leverage at the table.
3. A Guide for Strategy:
○ The BATNA guides your entire strategy. If your BATNA is currently weak, the
most useful thing you can do is spend time improving it, rather than just arguing
at the table. Conversely, if your BATNA is very strong, you can afford to negotiate
more assertively, secure in the knowledge of your viable alternative.
4. A Response to Threats and Hardball Tactics:
○ When the other side employs hardball tactics or threats (e.g., "Take this or the
deal is off"), your BATNA gives you a rational, non-emotional response. Instead
of reacting with anger, you can simply compare their final offer to your BATNA. If
your BATNA is better, you can calmly say, "That's a very difficult position for me,
as I have an alternative that is demonstrably better for me at this time." This
shifts the focus away from their arbitrary will and back to rational comparison.
In essence, having a well-prepared BATNA shifts your focus from needing a deal to seeking a
better one, transforming a fearful need into a confident choice.