INTRODUCTION

Getting to Yes: Negotiating an agreement without giving in is a non-fictional book by Roger

Fisher, William Ury and Bruce Patton. This book first edition published in 1981 and it became a
bestselling book.
According the book, negotiating is a back and forth communication between two or more parties
designed to reach an agreement when some interests are shared and others are opposed.
Negotiation is a fact of life whether someone likes it or not the truth is everyone is a negotiator.
Negotiators can find ways of getting to yes that reduce the need to rely on hard bargaining tactics
and unnecessary concessions.
In this book, four negotiation skills have introduced and explained to help one on his/ her
journey of getting to yes. These are
Separate the people from the problem
Focus on interests, not position
Invent options for mutual gain
Insist on using developing criteria

THE PROBLEM: DONT BARGAIN OVER POSITIONS

In everydays negotiation people find themselves in dilemma and worn out. So they try to deal
the negotiating in soft or hard way. Authors have illustrated the soft and hard negotiation with
example. It seems soft negotiator wants to avoid personal conflict where as hard negotiator takes
place an extreme position and holds out longer. It is true that due to avoid personal conflicts soft
negotiator reaches an agreement fast but feels bitter after that where as the long holding on the
negotiating exhausts both hard negotiator and other parties and harms the relationship with each
other. To avoid any personal conflict and relationship harm, the book has suggested a third way
to deal any negotiation, the principled negotiation.
The problem arises when people lock themselves in positional bargaining. This statement is true.
This moves away the negotiation from the problem to more personal conflicts where it loses the
purpose of negotiating in the first place. That is when the principled negotiation method can be
used. The suggested four basic points have to consider while dealing negotiation is people,
interests, options and criteria. The authors have depicted the problem in soft and hard way then
given solution based on the principled method where the four basic criteria have shown. It is

1
understandable up to this point, the question arises here is all the situation can be measured under
this basic four points. The authors have shown some methods to deal with negotiation.

METHOD 1: SEPARATE THE PEOPLE FROM THE PROBLEM

Negotiators are people first because human being is not computer. That is why we, people have
emotions, deeply held values and unpredictable. These all are true but where is the problem then.
According to the book, every negotiator has two kinds of interests: in the substance and in the
relationship. The relationship tends to become entangled with the problem. This is called the
people problem. The authors have suggested disentangling the two and dealing directly with the
people problem. The ways authors have suggested to deal with people problem is true and
effective mutually understood perceptions, clear two-way communication, and expressing
emotions without blame. To separate people from the problem authors have shown several
criteria under those three categories. For perception, one needs to know others thinking as well
let them say first about their demands. For emotion, people have personal feelings and one
should know first about the opponents emotion such as personal feelings, fears, hopes, and
dreams. For communication, authors have suggested active listen the opponent. By using these
strategies one can easily separate people from problem and these are realistic also to apply on
any negotiation.

METHOD 2: FOCUS ON INTEREST, NOT POSITION

People get into quarrel with each other to gain their own interest and then arises the need of
negotiation. The book states that the problem of negotiation is the conflict between the partys
concerns, needs, desires and fears. In short, these all can be expressed in a word, interest.
According to the book, interest reconciliation rather than compromise positions works for 2
reasons-
1. For every interest there usually exist several possible positions that could satisfy it
2. Behind opposed positions lie many shared and compatible interests with conflicting ones
Identifying interest and talking about interest helps the understanding of focusing of interest
rather than position. Some techniques of identifying the underlying interests are:
Asking Why : Putting one in others shoe to examine and understand the reason of their
position
Asking Why not: Thinking about others choice or identifying the reason standing in
their way not to make the probable decision

2
 Realizing that each side of the negotiation has many interest, not just one
Searching for the basic interest: Basic human needs are the most powerful interest that
motivates all people. And taking care of these needs can help to reach an agreement.
Making a list of various interests of both side, enables the improvement of quality,
estimation of order importance as well as stimulate ideas to meet the interest
The chance of other sides to take ones interest into account increases through communication.
One should explain other about the interest. Some techniques that help talking about interests
are:
One should try to make the other side understand the importance of the interest by being
specific. One should also show openness to convince the other to feel the same if they
were in ones shoe
To make other people appreciate ones interest, one should begin with appreciating theirs.
It also helps to acknowledge other sides interest as a part of the overall problem
To make someone listen to the ideas, first give the reasoning instead of own proposal
One should look forward to the achievement instead of looking back to the past grievance
Illustrating the specificity, means thinking in terms of more than one option to keep the
flexibility
One should be committed to the interest, not to the position being soft to the people and
hard to the problem. In case of two negotiator, they will surely come up with mutually
advantageous solution by pushing their interests and stimulating creativity

METHOD 3: INVENT OPTIONS FOR MUTUAL GAIN

In case of dispute people think that their position is right, reasonable and should be accepted. But
for negotiation there must have many options. But usually splitting the difference is the only
creative option to suggest. Four major obstacles in inventing abundant options are-
1. Premature judgment or normal state of affair of not inventing
2. Searching for single answer or narrowing the gap between positions instead of
broadening options
3. Fixed pie assumption which means either /or situation for the parties
4. Not trying to solve other partys problem, thinking that is their problem to solve
Coming up with creative option is one of the most useful assets of a negotiator. 4 steps can help
to invent options. These are-

3
 Separating the act of inventing option from judging them: One should separate the act of
creative thinking from the act of deciding or criticizing through a brainstorming session
Broadening options: generating more ideas from the main theme by considering the
problem from different perspective
Looking for mutual gain: Making the negotiation smoother and agreeable by identifying
shared interests (good for both the parties)
Trying to make other sides decision easy by putting oneself in their shoes. One should
try to look for guides for others rather than making it more difficult because, the success
of negotiation depends upon their decision making also
These two techniques seemed quite similar to me considering the example of two sisters,
quarrelling for a piece of orange. When it was divided between them, one sister ate the fruit and
threw away the peel whereas another one threw away the fruit and took the peel to make cake.
Here, we can only need to focus on interest instead of dividing the idea in two different methods.

METHOD 4: INSIST ON USING OBJECTIVE CRITERIA

We have separated people from the problem, understood the interests of the other sides, invented
ways to reconciling interests even though one will almost face the harsh reality of interests that
conflict, according to Fisher and Ury. Now what else can people do to settle a negotiation.
Authors have formulated the last method to settle any negotiation which is insisting on using
objective criteria. If one tries to settle differences of interests, the solution is to negotiate on the
basis independent of the will of either side and that is on the basis of objective criteria.
People can insist on anything while negotiating but would that be a solution of the problem, no,
according to the book, one needs to develop some alternative standards beforehand and think
through them and decide one to use. We know that sometimes people can insist on substantive
criteria and can be biased but while developing objective there needs to remember two things
one is fair standards and fair procedure. These are very true and realistic also. One cannot be
swayed by the biasness while negotiating to settle some problems and also if the procedure is not
fair for both parties there is no further reason for continuing negotiations, it will be a result of
soft or hard bargaining. So, one is needed to remember this.
Now, one has identified some objective criteria and procedures, s/he is all ready to win a
negotiation but how is s/he going to discuss about those objectives with the other party, authors
have stated three basic points to remember. When we want to buy something, buyer and seller
always wants a lower and higher price for the product respectively, negotiation goes on without

4
any ending, here both party needs a shared goal which is fair price, this is the number one point
to remember - frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria. Question may arise on this
point that how can both party have a shared goal, the answer is if there would be no shared goal,
there was not a negotiation in the first place. The second one is when other side makes a
proposal, one is needed to ask the theory behind it and that is lead to different reasoning and
authors have said that reason and be open to reason. The third point is never swayed by any kind
of pressure be it a bribe, a threat, a manipulative appeal to trust or a simple refusal to budge, in
these situations one party needs to invite the party to state their reasoning first and then the first
party can apply the identified objectives never yield to pressure, only to principal.
After reviewing this objective criteria method, we say that what authors have stated are effective
for both parties and can settle any negotiation be it an easy or hard one. Furthermore, we need to
remember that to settle a negotiation we have to consider all four methods of principled
negotiation. However, there is a simple question may still hang up in the mind of negotiators,
what if they are more powerful, how we are going to win, the authors have splendidly described
some techniques and points to remember in those situations.

WHAT IF THEY ARE MORE POWERFUL?

(Develop Your BATNA Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement)

Differences in power can never be brought under control in any of the negotiation methods. Yet,
Fisher and Ury recommended being ready with a BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated
Agreement) before going for a negotiation so that the weaker party have a minimum threshold
level prepared in mind below which they will dismiss the agreement. Moreover, a better BATNA
assures greater power to them which ensures that they can make the most of their assets. These
two objectives will at least protect them from settling with a deal they would have otherwise
rejected. Usually, in order to protect themselves from ending up with a poor agreement
negotiators set a bottom line in advance which is their worst acceptable outcome and they decide
to disagree with any settlement below that bottom line. As the bottom line limit value is settled
before the discussion with the other party so that figure might be vague so Fisher and Ury do not
support the idea of using bottom lines. Moreover, committing to a fixed bottom line also restricts
the idea generation of different options during the discussion. According to the authors,
negotiation is done to get a better outcome than they can get without negotiating so it is very
important for the weaker party to have its best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA)
ready so that they can disapprove the agreement that leaves a unfavorable situation for them than

5
their BATNA. Furthermore, the author reflected that the weaker party cannot have a WIN-WIN
situation without the BATNA as then they would be simply negotiating without any prior plan
with their eyes blindfolded and make them hesitant to discover alternatives. Despite the BATNA
the weaker party should formulate a trip wire which keeps some margin in hand if the agreement
is worse than the trip wire package. Basically, the trip wire package is far from the perfect
agreement which is better than the BATNA.
Protection from an unacceptable agreement is one objective of negotiation. The other objective is
making the most of the current assets and the BATNA has a vital role in it. The ability to not go
for the negotiation and get away from it provides power in a negotiation so the level of power
increases with the improvement in BATNA. Three different operations are required to develop
the BATNA. Firstly, the party has to create some options which it can take if the agreement is
dismissed. Secondly, to develop the innovative ideas into a real life alternative. Lastly, the party
has to select the best option temporarily which they will use to judge the agreement. Knowing
about the powerful parties BATNA enables improved understanding of the negotiation's content
which automatically increases the confidence of the weaker party for better result of the
negotiation. Hence, having a good BATNA can help them negotiate on the merits. Getting ready
with a BATNA not only allow them to figure out the minimum acceptable agreement but it will
enhance that minimum.

WHAT IF THEY WON'T PLAY?

(Use Negotiation Jujitsu)
The powerful party sometimes disagrees with principled negotiations rather they want to be
proud of their positions, thinking only about their self motives and making personal attacks. The
authors provided three basic ways for bringing their attention on merits. Firstly, the party itself
should give more priority to merits than on positions and use principled negotiations to
encourage them to use it too. Still if they remain adamant to use principled negotiations they can
use the second strategy known as negotiation jujitsu. What the third party can do is the third
approach which is known as the one-text mediation procedure.
There is a proverb that if the dog bites human then the human beings is not supposed to bite them
back. The negotiation jujitsu uses that strategy which demonstrates that if the powerful side
attack taking benefit of their position, the weaker party should not counter attack rather they
should deviate the attack back on to the problem. Taking the powerful party's position as an
option they have to reflect the reasons behind it and think of ways of better negotiation rather

6
than attacking back at their position. The attacks should be dealt in a matured way by inviting
them to criticize more for enhanced feedback and suggestions. Deviate the personal attacks
towards the problem and patiently show them that you understand their problem. Silence is the
key to win any argument or conflicting situation so they should ask questions and stay quiet
rather than providing statements which creates conflict.
The third approach that can be used to take the powerful party out of its positional bargaining is
the one-text procedure where a third party is involved who interviews both parties separately to
make a draft based on their interests, comments and criticisms through which the third party
prepares a proposal. The proposal is edited and redrafted again and again by the third party until
there is no scope of further improvements. The parties must take the decision now either to
accept the thoroughly prepared proposal or to reject the negotiation.

WHAT IF THEY USE DIRTY TRICKS?

Principle negotiations being very well a deal can be successful but sometimes parties try to use
dirty tactics or tricks to deceive the other parties. They use from lies to psychological abuse to
take advantage in a negotiation. Mostly people answer back in two ways in case unfair tactics,
one being to be regular in that situation being noiseless and the other to be open. There are some
ways to avoid those that the book talks about. First it goes with about setting the rules of the
game. Getting the positions of negotiation right & if there is any difficult situations. In that
process it in the topmost position not to attack the person but to talk about the legitimacy of the
deal. Discussing the tactic not the person will make the person question himself/herself in the
first place. The target would be to target the tactics not the person, to separate the facts from the
tactics talk about it and to finish on a mutual gain situation.
Some collective tricky tactics are divided into three different classes, deliberate deception,
Psychological warfare, and Positional pressure tactics. These tricks debate about the possible
situations in a negotiation and how to overcome them. Deliberate deception is about
misrepresentation the facts or misleading the other party. It also contains second bite of the
apple which is keeping the negation midway through for a second opinion. Psychological
warfare enlightens about the fact of pressurizing the other party during a negotiation. It can be
with stressful situation, personal attacks or threats. The interesting element is the good guy bad
guy routine. Put the negotiation party in a stressful situation and then change the environment so
that they can have the same way as the other party wants. Positional pressure tactics is all that
common tactics to use the positional power to get the deal/negotiation done. The book also talks

7
about not to be a victim in those situations. To be normal and get the facts right the rest of the
things will work their way in the right way.
CONCLUSION
Getting to Yes the book is about how you as a negotiator should approach. We all in our life
are negotiating most often than not. How we settle our differences for a negotiation or how we
should approach for a negotiation. The book gives a conceptual framework for negotiators which
are creative & both parties will be benefited. Sometimes both parties are hard to crack so the
negotiation is near impossible with the principle negotiation framework talked about in this book
are worth trying.
There might not be any new solutions or ways that we do not know, but the book points out some
common sense or experience that gives chance to build up in negotiations. There are also some
tricky examples given in the book how one can lose the negotiation in the first go. But the
positive thing is that the book somewhat gives a way to approach and negotiate. Some ideas are
given about how you should approach for the first time negotiation, the balanced situation and
mistake you are making if any. These facts are there only to make you better but the person that
can make you better is only yourself.
In a negotiation both parties look to win so it is essential that they should go for a win-win
situation. There can be some personal or professional differences between parties, so the
negotiation should work as in both parties are interested to join. The goal should not be to win
all the time. The goal should be not to lose whatever the situation might be.
The critical nature of the book is that the authors think they can be soft on people ad hard on the
situation. In all cases it is not the same. There might be some difficult negotiators, so there
should be a way that allows to go soft or hard on the situation and as well as on the people.
Leadership, sometimes its thorough sometimes its because of present situation. Whatever it is
most people want to live as a leader and a great leader sometimes might have to work as a
negotiator. The book shows some negotiation ways and advises to practice them. These ways can
be very effective in negotiations.

References

1. Roger Fisher, William Ury and Bruce Patton, Getting to Yes: Negotiating without giving
in, Second edition.