 |
International Online Training Program On Intractable Conflict |
Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, USA |
|
International Online Training Program On Intractable Conflict |
Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, USA |
Opening Page | Glossary | Menu Shortcut Page
Negotiation is the fundamental form of dispute resolution. In simplest terms, it involves a discussion between two or more disputants who are trying to work out a solution to their dispute. It may even be done in advance, to avoid disputes. For example, when we discuss simple life choices with family members--who does which chores, what family activities are planned for when--we are negotiating. When we bargain over the price of a product or service, we are negotiating. In order to live or work effectively with others, good negotiation skills are critical.
Negotiation can take several forms. Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton's best-selling book, Getting to Yes (1991), highlights three forms of negotiation or bargaining: hard, soft, and principled. Hard bargaining is adversarial--you assume that your opponent is your enemy and the only way you can win is if he or she loses. So you bargain in a very aggressive, competitive way. Soft bargaining is just the opposite. Your relationship with your opponent is so important that you concede much more easily than you should. You get taken advantage of in your effort to please, and while agreement is reached easily, it is seldom a wise one.
Fisher, Ury, and Patton propose a third alternative, which they call "principled negotiation." This approach calls for negotiators to use five fundamental principles to negotiate effectively with each other instead of against each other. These are: 1) separate the people from the problem, 2) negotiate about interests, not positions, 3) invent options for mutual gain, 4) insist on objective decision criteria, and 5) know your BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement). (For more information on principled negotiation, click here.)
Critics of principled negotiation argue that it only works in situations in which win-win outcomes are possible. In unavoidable win-lose conflicts, some critics argue, the techniques of distributive bargaining are superior. Distributive bargaining starts with the assumption that there is only a limited amount of "stuff" to go around, and that the more that one side gets, the less the other side will be able to have. This is inherently a competitive situation, which calls for competitive negotiating tactics. (For more information about competitive negotiating tactics, click here.)
While negotiation is the "pure" form of bargaining, it can be enhanced in many ways. Mediation, for example, is assisted negotiation, as is consensus-building. Many other forms of "alternative dispute resolution" (a term developed in the U.S. to refer to alternatives to litigation) are also simply varieties of negotiation.
Copyright ©1998 Conflict Research Consortium -- Contact: crc@colorado.edu