[Book 33] Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and William Ury

Getting to Yes deconstructs the key components of negotiation and provides advice on how to do it most effectively. Roger and William explain that it’s crucial to separate the people from the problem, which will allow you negotiate hard on the problem while being soft on the people. Beyond understanding the other side’s position, being able to empathize with their viewpoint is crucial to navigate a path forward. Even if off-base or misguided, their feelings are often as large of a focus area as the substance of the issue itself.

To negotiate most effectively, focus on interests rather than positions. Interests are the “why” driving their position and can be used to create alternatives that are more favorable to you with limited (or no) sacrifice to them. It’s best present multiple viable options so that the chosen path, while rarely perfect, is the best available choice. Before making a decision, establish fair criteria for which to base the recommendation on.

This book has helped me better understand my colleagues perspectives and improve upon many solutions by carefully focusing on what’s most important to them.

You should read this book if you…

• want to improve your negotiation skills
• seek to bring in more perspectives when making decisions
• get stuck getting aligned with difficult people

Additional Information

Year Published: 1981
Book Ranking (from 1-10): 8 – Very Good – In depth insights on a specific topic
Ease of Read (from 1-5): 3 – Average

Key Highlights

1. The method of principled negotiation developed at the Harvard Negotiation Project is to decide issues on their merits rather than through a haggling process focused on what each side says it will and won’t do. It suggests that you look for mutual gains whenever possible, and that where your interests conflict, you should insist that the result be based on some fair standards independent of the will of either side. The method of principled negotiation is hard on the merits, soft on the people. It employs no tricks and no posturing. Principled negotiation shows you how to obtain what you are entitled to and still be decent. It enables you to be fair while protecting you against those who would take advantage of your fairness
2. Any method of negotiation may be fairly judged by three criteria: It should produce a wise agreement if agreement is possible. It should be efficient. And it should improve or at least not damage the relationship between the parties
3. The more you clarify your position and defend it against attack, the more committed you become to it. The more you try to convince the other side of the impossibility of changing your opening position, the more difficult it becomes to do so. Your ego becomes identified with your position
4. Principled Negotiation Four Points: 1) People: Separate the people from the problem. 2) Interests: Focus on interests, not positions. 3) Options: Invent multiple options looking for mutual gains before deciding what to do. 4) Criteria: Insist that the result be based on some objective standard
5. The four propositions of principled negotiation are relevant from the time you begin to think about negotiating until the time either an agreement is reached or you decide to break off the effort. That period can be divided into three stages: analysis, planning, and discussion. During the analysis stage you are simply trying to diagnose the situation— to gather information, organize it, and think about it. During the planning stage you deal with the same four elements a second time, both generating ideas and deciding what to do. Again during the discussion stage, when the parties communicate back and forth, looking toward agreement, the same four elements are the best subjects to discuss
6. Ultimately, however, conflict lies not in objective reality, but in people’s 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. Fears, even if ill- founded, are real fears and need to be dealt with. The ability to see the situation as the other side sees it, as difficult as it may be, is one of the most important skills a negotiator can possess. It is not enough to know that they see things differently. If you want to influence them, you also need to understand empathetically the power of their point of view and to feel the emotional force with which they believe in it. Understanding their point of view is not the same as agreeing with it
7. Pay attention to “core concerns.” Many emotions in negotiation are driven by a core set of five interests: autonomy, the desire to make your own choices and control your own fate; appreciation, the desire to be recognized and valued; affiliation, the desire to belong as an accepted member of some peer group; role, the desire to have a meaningful purpose; and status, the desire to feel fairly seen and acknowledged
8. As you repeat what you understood them to have said, phrase it positively from their point of view, making the strength of their case clear. You might say, “You have a strong case. Let me see if I can explain it. Here’s the way it strikes me. . . .” Understanding is not agreeing
9. Speak about yourself, not about them. In many negotiations, each side explains and condemns at great length the motivations and intentions of the other side. It is more persuasive, however, to describe a problem in terms of its impact on you than in terms of what they did or why: “I feel let down” instead of “You broke your word.”
10. Interests motivate people; they are the silent movers behind the hubbub of positions. Your position is something you have decided upon. Your interests are what caused you to so decide. When you do look behind opposed positions for the motivating interests, you can often find an alternative position that meets not only your interests but theirs as well. How do you identify interests? Ask why, and then ask yourself why not
11. Be hard on the problem, soft on the people. You can be just as hard in talking about your interests as any negotiator can be in talking about their position. In fact, it is usually advisable to be hard
12. What is your BATNA— your Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement? That is the standard against which any proposed agreement should be measured. That is the only standard that can protect you both from accepting terms that are too unfavorable and from rejecting terms it would be in your interest to accept. The insecurity of an unknown BATNA. If you have not thought carefully about what you will do if you fail to reach an agreement, you are negotiating with your eyes closed
13. Develop your BATNA. Vigorous exploration of what you will do if you do not reach agreement can greatly strengthen your hand. Attractive alternatives are not just sitting there waiting for you; you usually have to develop them. Generating possible BATNAs requires three distinct operations: (1) inventing a list of actions you might conceivably take if no agreement is reached; (2) improving some of the more promising ideas and converting them into practical alternatives; and (3) selecting, tentatively, the one alternative that seems best
14. Consider the other side’s BATNA. You should also think about the alternatives to a negotiated agreement available to the other side. The more you can learn of their alternatives, the better prepared you are for negotiation. Knowing their alternatives, you can realistically estimate what you can expect from the negotiation
15. Don’t defend your ideas, invite criticism and advice. A lot of time in negotiation is spent criticizing. Rather than resisting the other side’s criticism, invite it. Instead of asking them to accept or reject an idea, ask them what’s wrong with it. “What concerns of yours would this salary proposal fail to take into account?” Examine their negative judgments to find out their underlying interests and to improve your ideas from their point of view. Rework your ideas in light of what you learn from them, and thus turn criticism from an obstacle in the process of working toward agreement into an essential ingredient of that process
16. Ask questions and pause. Those engaged in negotiation jujitsu use two key tools. The first is to use questions instead of statements. Statements generate resistance, whereas questions generate answers. Questions allow the other side to get their points across and let you understand them. They pose challenges and can be used to lead the other side to confront the problem. Questions offer them no target to strike at, no position to attack. Questions do not criticize, they educate
17. Silence is one of your best weapons. Use it. If they have made an unreasonable proposal or an attack you regard as unjustified, the best thing to do may be to sit there and not say a word. If you have asked an honest question to which they have provided an insufficient answer, just wait. People tend to feel uncomfortable with silence, particularly if they have doubts about the merits of something they have said
18. Unless you have good reason to trust somebody, don’t. This does not mean calling him a liar; rather it means making the negotiation proceed independent of trust. Do not let someone treat your doubts as a personal attack
19. It may help to ask yourself such questions as: Is this an approach I would use in dealing with a good friend or a member of my family? If a full account of what I said and did appeared in the media, would I be embarrassed? In literature, would such conduct be more appropriate for a hero or a villain?
20. Strategy depends on preparation. If you are well prepared, a strategy will suggest itself. If you are well versed in the standards relevant to your negotiation, it will be obvious which ones to discuss and which ones the other side might raise. If you have thoroughly considered your interests, it will be clear which ones to mention early on and which ones to bring up later or not at all. And if you have formulated your BATNA in advance, you’ll know when it’s time to walk. Second, a clever strategy cannot make up for lack of preparation. If you formulate a step- by- step strategy that is sure to knock their socks off, you will run into trouble when they come into the negotiation wearing sandals. Your strategy might depend on discussing relationship issues at the beginning, but they might want to talk about BATNAs. Because you can never be sure what their strategy will be, it is far better to know the terrain than to plan on taking one particular path through the woods
21. Think about closure from the beginning. Before you even begin to negotiate, it makes sense to envision what a successful agreement might look like. This will help you figure out what issues will need to be dealt with in the negotiation and what it might take to resolve them. Imagine what it might be like to implement an agreement. What issues would need to be resolved? Then work backward. Ask yourself how the other side might successfully explain and justify an agreement to their constituents