- Getting the Other Side to the Table:

1- In many cases, issues you may want to negotiate can't move forward because 1 or more parties simply aren’t interested—
they are satisfied with the status quo. They see no point in negotiating with you. And if they have greater organizational
power than you, they may brush you off with these types of comments: “I don’t think there is any reason to consider this”
2- there are 3 things you can do to help reluctant bargainers reach this conclusion:
(1) Offer incentives: What are the reluctant person’s needs: money, time, your support? Determine those needs and then
pose them as potential benefits of negotiations. For example, if your boss is reluctant to give you time to work on a redesign
of the company’s inventory system, explain how an improved system will help solve 1 of his problems.
(2) Put a price on the status quo: Spell out the cost of not negotiating. There're an example of a woman whose boss
promoted her but was forever delaying any discussion of a pay raise. She found a way to get his attention as she secured a
job offer from another company. The boss was suddenly very interested in dealing with her long overdue pay raise. He had
to negotiate or face the costly and time-consuming process of replacing an effective subordinate.
(3) Enlist support: Allies can achieve what other measures can't. For example, if the manager described earlier still will not
give you time off to improve the inventory system, look for allies who have organizational power. The chief financial
officer, for instance, will likely favor any plan to improve inventory management. Once the sales manager realizes that the
issue has risen to the senior management level, he’s likely to bargain.
- Making a Good Start: 1- Once you’ve gotten the other side to the bargaining table, it’s important to begin with a
smooth start. That begins with relieving the tension that is often present. Try to: Express respect for the other side’s
experience and expertise - Frame the task positively, as a joint endeavor - Emphasize your openness to the other side’s
interests.
2- Tips for Establishing the Right Tone: Never underestimate the value of “breaking bread.” So have coffee and soft drinks
available - Use small talk at the beginning to dispel tension and begin the process of building relationships - If the other side
is very formal, don’t speak too casually. If the other side is decidedly informal, speak in a more casual way.
3- After these opening remarks, start with the agenda, making sure both parties has a common understanding of the issues to
be covered. Then, discuss the process
4- Listen carefully to the discussion of process—it will tell you a great deal about the other side’s negotiating style. Offer to
explain some of your first. This is a good-faith demonstration that you are prepared to disclose info, provided that the
exchange is reciprocal. If the other side doesn't reciprocate with info, be very cautious about providing more info.
- Tactics for Win-Lose Negotiations: 1- Anchoring:
A- An attempt to establish a reference point around which negotiations will make adjustments. In some cases, you can gain
an advantage by putting the first offer on the table. Consider this example: Jake was selling his house. The house had a
unique design. “If I can get $350,000, I’ll be satisfied. If that’s not possible, I’ll hold onto it for another year.” His agent
suggested that he put the house on the market at $395,000, so he did. In the weeks that followed, Jake’s listed price became
the anchor point for subsequent negotiations with 4 potential buyers, all people from outside the area. 3 of the four made
offers at slightly lower levels—$370,000, $375,000, and $390,000—hoping to make a deal with Jake somewhere in the
middle. The fourth, sensing keen competition for the house that she wanted badly, offered to pay the full listing price.
B- When should you anchor? It may be smart to anchor when you have a reasonably good sense of the other side’s
reservation price. If you are uncertain about his reservation price, you may encourage him to make the first move.
C- Where should you place your anchor? Your first offer should be at or just a bit beyond what you believe is the other
side’s reservation price, which may be determined through pre-negotiation investigation. Thus, if you had a sense of Jake’s
reservation price ($350,000), you might make a first offer at $325,000 and allow him to score some points in negotiating the
deal up to $350,000 (assuming you think that amount represents a good and acceptable price). Wherever you place the
anchor, be prepared to articulate why your offer is reasonable.
D- Anchoring with a price creates 2 risks. First, if you are too aggressive, the other side may conclude it will be impossible
to make a deal with you. Second, if you’ve made an erroneous estimate of the other side’s reservation price, your offer will
be outside the ZOPA. The best safeguard against making a wrong anchoring attempt is preparation prior to negotiations.
- 2- Counter anchoring:
A- If the other side makes the first offer, you should recognize that offer’s potential power as a psychological anchor.

1
 Remember that anchors are most powerful when uncertainty is highest. For example, when no one has a clear idea what the
price of a company or a piece of equipment should be, there is no basis for disputing the merits of the first offer.
B- You can reduce the other side’s anchoring power by gathering and bringing objective info to the bargaining table.
C- Don’t let the other side set the bargaining range with an anchor unless you think it’s a sensible starting point. If you think
the anchor suggests an unacceptable starting point, steer the conversation away from numbers and focus instead on interests
and concerns. Then, after some time has passed and more information has surfaced, put your number or your proposal on
the table, and support it with sound reasoning.
D-To see how this might be done; let’s replay the example of Jake and his lake house. But this time, let’s assume that only
one potential buyer, Carla, steps forward: The real estate agent had just listed Jake’s house for $395,000, confident that that
number would be a firm anchor point for all incoming bids. But he hadn’t counted on dealing with Carla. Carla had had her
eye on the lakefront property market in the Deer Tail Lake area for the past 2 years, so she was familiar with all the current
property listings that had sold over that time period. During her first meeting with Jake’s agent, Carla explained how she had
been tracking property prices on Deer Tail Lake for the past 2 years. Without making any reference to Jake’s $395,000
asking price. “These three are very comparable to your listing in terms of house characteristics,” she told the agent as she
showed him the listing sheets. “They sold for $325,000, $330,000 and $345,000, respectively. Factoring in inflation that
makes your client’s property worth $350,000, this is what I’m prepared to offer you today.
E- The lesson of this tale is to avoid direct comparison between the other side’s initial offer and your own. If the initial offer
isn't serious, you can safely ignore it; there’s a good chance that the other side will do the same. If the initial offer was
serious, and the other side refers to it again, you should respectfully ask them to explain why the offer is reasonable.
- 3- Be Prepared for Concessionary Moves:
A- Once an anchor point is on the table, the parties “generally engage in a set of moves and countermoves that they hope
will end in an agreeable price. For example, if Carla in the previous example offered $350,000 for Jake’s property, Jake
more than likely would respond with a counteroffer through his agent, say, $385,000: We appreciate the research you’ve
done on recent lake property sales, Carla, but we don’t feel that the properties you’ve used as benchmarks are really
comparable to Jake’s place. After all, he has that big pier and boathouse—and the house itself has been recently renovated.
Taking those factors into account, we think that Jake’s property is worth substantially more than your offer. However, in the
interest of getting things wrapped up, Jake is willing to lower his price by $10,000 to $385,000.”
B- a large concessionary move is an indicator of significant additional flexibility. Give a large concession, and the other side
will think that you’re capable of making additional large concessions. Thus, Carla may think “If Jake is willing to come
down $10,000 in this first counteroffer, he’s probably prepared to come down at least another $10,000.” and that further
pushing will result in smaller and smaller concessions. These assumptions are not always true, especially when the other
side is in no hurry, and when it has confidence that other parties may come forward with attractive prices or conditions—
that is, when it has a strong BATNA.
C- The best advice about concessions is to avoid the impulse to make them. Few of us like negotiating, so we want to get it
over as quickly as possible. If you find yourself in this category, here are a few tips:
(1) Look to your BATNA before making a concession: If your BATNA is strong , a concession may be unnecessary
(2) If you’re impatient to get it over with because negotiating is stressful, take a break before you consider a concession.
(3) If your need to be liked is urging you to make a concession, forget about it because that isn't about making friends.
- The Ticking Clock: In a buyer-seller negotiation, time can be an important tool. From the buyer’s perspective,
the seller should never be allowed to feel that he can “indefinitely sit on the buyer’s most recent bid while he awaits a better
offer. The seller will simply use the offer to improve his BATNA. The remedy is to attach an expiration date to the offer to
buy. Negotiators refer to this tactic as an exploding offer. If Carla decided to counter Jake’s latest offer ($385,000) with a bid
of $360,000, she might say that “this offer is good until 9 p.m. on this coming Saturday, September 23.” That expiration date
would put a fire under Jake and force him to make a decision.
- Package Options for a Favorable Deal:
A- Offering alternative proposals are often an effective deal-making tactic. Consider this example: Joe is negotiating with
Robert and Sharon for the purchase of their small sailboat and trailer. The trailer is of minimal importance to Joe because he
expects to secure a permanent mooring. But it wouldn’t be a bad thing to own, as he may have to tow the boat someday. So

2
 he makes alternative proposals: “I’m willing to pay $18,000 for the boat and trailer as a package, or $16,000 for the boat
alone. You could sell the trailer separately. What’s your preference?”
B- Package options have dual benefits. First, people don’t like to feel pushed into a corner. But when presented with
alternative proposals, people may compare the proposals to each other instead of to their original goals. In addition, when
the other negotiators won’t discuss their interests, you can often know them by noticing which proposal they prefer.
C- Before presenting alternative proposals, do the following: Assess the value of each option to each side - If you prefer 1 of
the alternatives, adjust at least 1 of the proposals so that you feel equally positive about at least 2 of them.
- Closing the Deal: Here are 4 recommended steps for closing the deal:
1-Signal the end of the road before you get there: If you have been negotiating back and forth, showing flexibility on
various issues, and then suddenly announce you’re at your bottom line, you are likely to be not taken seriously so repeat the
warning, not as a threat but as a courtesy, particularly if the other negotiator expect a lot more movement in his direction.
2-Allow flexibility if you anticipate going beyond the final round: If you are aware that the other negotiator lacks final
authority, leave yourself some flexibility in the final terms. Don’t give the other side your best and last offer—save that in
case you have to bend during the final round but don’t create much flexibility as the deal will be rejected by the other side
3-Discourage the other side from seeking further concessions: express your willingness to accept the total package without
changes. Explain that adjustment in their favor on 1 term would have to be balanced by adjustment in your favor on another.
4-Write down the terms: recording the terms of the agreement avoids future disputes and confusion. Write an informal
agreement in principle. Decide whether it is binding or not, and say so in the document.
- Tactics for Integrative Negotiations: Getting Started:
Observe the suggestions offered earlier in the section “Making a Good Start” and the “Tips” box regarding setting the right
tone. They apply equally here. Frame the task positively and emphasize your openness to the other side’s interests. As you
learn about the other side’s concerns and interests, don’t make a proposal too quickly. Instead of hastily throwing out an
offer, try these techniques:
1- Ask open-ended questions about the other side’s needs and goals. 2- Try the other side’s willingness to trade off one
thing for another. 3- Inquire about the other side’s underlying interests by asking why certain conditions
4- Listen closely to the other side’s responses without jumping in to correct, or object. 5- Be an active listener.
6- Express empathy for the other side’s perspective, needs, and interests. 7- Work to create a two-way exchange of info.
- Tips for Active Listening:
1- Keep your eyes on the speaker. 2- Take notes as appropriate. 3- Don’t allow yourself to think about anything but
what the speaker is saying. 4- Resist the urge to formulate your response until after the speaker has finished.
5- Pay attention to the speaker’s body language. 6- Ask questions to get more info. 7- Refrain from personal attacks. Don’t
accuse or blame. 8- Don’t feel pressured to close a deal too quickly. Instead, generate options that offer mutual gain.
- Look for options that exploit differences: During the negotiation, you are confronted with the other side’s
positions and come to understand the interests underlying those positions. It is hoped that the other side will understand your
interests just as well. The challenge now is to arrive at an outcome that satisfies both parties’ interests. 1 place to look for a
mutually satisfying outcome is in the differences between the parties. By trading on differences, you create value that
neither party could have created on its own. In particular, look for differences in these places:
1- Access to resources: For example, Ali, who owns both a store and a restaurant, is negotiating with a designer for his
services in renovating the restaurant. He agrees to pay a higher price than planned for the restaurant design in exchange for
the designer ordering fixtures and furnishings for the retail store at his trade discount. The owner wouldn't otherwise have
ready access to these discounts—yet providing those costs the designer nothing. Value has been created for both sides.
2- Future expectations: For example, the current owner of a business is selling. He demands a high price because he predicts
that the market for his product will increase over time. The potential buyer is unwilling to pay that high price; she doesn't
share the owner’s rosy outlook. Within this difference of opinion, they see an opportunity. They agree to a base sale price,
plus 20% of the company’s increased revenues over the next 5 years—if any—with the current owner providing advice and
assisting with marketing and distribution plans over that period. Under this arrangement, the buyer will get a lower price
and the seller will be able to capture the upside growth in the business he anticipates.
3- Time preference: For example, Jonathan is happy with the CEO’s plan to promote him to vice president of marketing, but

3
 unhappy that he must play a waiting role until the incumbent retires 6 months hence. The CEO, however, has arranged for
the current marketing VP to use that time to finalize the company’s strategic distribution agreement with its dealers. “He
engineered this strategy and has close personal ties to key players on the other side. I want him to conclude the deal. "Within
these differences, however, the CEO finds a solution: He will put Jonathan in charge of a team that is working on the plan to
implement the new distribution contract. That satisfies Jonathan and benefits the company.
4- Risk aversion: What is highly risky for 1 party is often less risky for another. Parties often have different risk tolerances.
In these cases, value can be created by shifting risk to the party better able to bear it—in exchange for higher potential
returns for the party assuming the risk.
- Take Your Time: Don’t close the deal too quickly when the first acceptable proposal is on the table but little info
has been exchanged. Signal that the proposal on the table is worth considering, but also state that it may be improved by
learning more about your respective interests. Then, begin the search for mutually beneficial options. To generate integrative
solutions: Move from a particular issue to a more general description of the problem and finally back to the specific issue -
Pay special attention to shared interests and opportunities for cooperation - Consider joint brainstorming with the other side
to generate creative alternatives.
- Framing:
1- Fill a glass of water halfway to the top. Now, if you described this glass to someone else, would you say it was half empty
or half full? Whichever way you describe the glass, you are framing the situation. If the other person accepts that frame
without question, subsequent discussion will proceed within that frame. This could be advantageous to you.
2- Like an anchor, a frame can determine how negotiations will ensue. It orients the parties and encourages them to examine
the issues within a defined perspective. Whichever side can get the other to buy into its frame will have a negotiating
advantage. How 1 side frames a solution can determine how others decide to behave. So, if you frame your position in terms
of a mental model the other side can embrace, you’ll have less trouble moving toward agreement. You can use these frames:
1- Frame your proposal in terms that represent a gain instead of a loss. 2- Tap into people’s natural aversion
to risk. Risk aversion has 2 consequences:
A- People who are risk averse will often accept larger potential losses in the future rather than incur smaller losses today.
B- Most people prefer a bird in the hand rather than two in the bush. In other words, they prefer the certainty of a smaller
offer to the uncertainty of a larger future gain.
- Continual Evaluation and Preparation:
1- We see negotiating as a process of preparation and eventual agreement or failure. The first step takes place away from the
table; the rest take place at the table. In simple interactions, this model often holds true. But many other negotiations are
complex. New info can appear at various points. Different parties can offer concessions or heighten their demands. This
more complex dynamic suggests a nonlinear approach to the preparation process, as shown in figure 4-1. Here preparation is
followed by negotiation, which produces outcomes and info that
require evaluation. The outputs of evaluation then feed into a
new round of preparation and subsequent negotiation. Round
and round it goes until agreement is reached.
2- Instead of setting your course based on pre-negotiation info,
consider: Take small steps, gathering better info as you proceed -
Continually learn from new info and the behavior of the other
side - Use that learning to adjust your course as you move
forward.
3- Evaluation is important and should be part of your tactics.
You ask yourself: How are things going? Are negotiations
proceeding along a track that will eventually serve my goals?
Are they playing my game, or am I playing theirs? Answering
these questions objectively isn’t easy. A person must take the
perspective of a neutral stranger and adopt an outside-looking-in
stance. This is essential to mastering the game.