This book (written by Roger Fisher, William Ury and Bruce Patton; published by Random House Business Books) begins with a question: what is the best way for people to deal with their differences? According to the authors, the negotiation game integrates two levels: (a) substance and (b) the procedure for dealing with substance.
To address both these levels, the method of principled negotiation (or negotiation on the merits) is proposed, which focuses in four points:
(a) People – separate the people from the problem;
(b) Interests – focus on interests, not positions;
(c) Options – Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do;
(d) Criteria – Insist that the result be based on some objective standard.
Expectably, the principled negotiation method of focusing on basic interests, mutually satisfying options and fair standards, typically results in a wise agreement and in an efficient decision.
The authors also make clear that the good negotiator should consider people as individuals with emotions, deep systemic values, widely different backgrounds and personal values and that “failing to deal with others sensitively as human beings prone to human reactions can be disastrous for a negotiation” and may endanger the interests of an ongoing relationship.
An interesting conclusion is drawn regarding perception: ultimately “conflict lies not in objective reality, but in peoples’ heads. Truth is simply one more argument – perhaps a good one, perhaps not – for dealing with the difference. The difference itself exists because it exists in their thinking”. Hence, it is important to put yourself in the other side shoes.
To sum up, this very interesting reading proposes a win-win approach to negotiation that avoids a choice “between the satisfactions of getting what you deserve and of being decent”, when you can have both.
To address both these levels, the method of principled negotiation (or negotiation on the merits) is proposed, which focuses in four points:
(a) People – separate the people from the problem;
(b) Interests – focus on interests, not positions;
(c) Options – Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do;
(d) Criteria – Insist that the result be based on some objective standard.
Expectably, the principled negotiation method of focusing on basic interests, mutually satisfying options and fair standards, typically results in a wise agreement and in an efficient decision.
The authors also make clear that the good negotiator should consider people as individuals with emotions, deep systemic values, widely different backgrounds and personal values and that “failing to deal with others sensitively as human beings prone to human reactions can be disastrous for a negotiation” and may endanger the interests of an ongoing relationship.
An interesting conclusion is drawn regarding perception: ultimately “conflict lies not in objective reality, but in peoples’ heads. Truth is simply one more argument – perhaps a good one, perhaps not – for dealing with the difference. The difference itself exists because it exists in their thinking”. Hence, it is important to put yourself in the other side shoes.
To sum up, this very interesting reading proposes a win-win approach to negotiation that avoids a choice “between the satisfactions of getting what you deserve and of being decent”, when you can have both.
