Successful Negotiation: 7 Steps to Yes

Negotiation styles 

When entering into a negotiation process, people will usually embody one of the five main negotiation styles. Each of the five represents an effort to balance the two components of negotiation—substance (results) and relationships (Cunha, Lourenço, Paiva, & Monteiro, 2016). The first is competing; competitive-style negotiators are often assertive and focused primarily on the material outcome of the deal. Often, negotiators of this style tend to pursue their own goals at the expense of the other party, favoring the substance over the relationship within the negotiation process. On the other hand, accommodating negotiators tend to value the relationship within the negotiation above the substance. They often focus on minimizing tension and reducing conflict to maintain a good relationship with their counterparts. Avoiding negotiators often experience the least-favorable outcomes, as they tend to shy away from conflict as well as efforts to resolve it. They are not likely to pursue their own interests during negotiating and often remain neutral, detached, or in submission to the opposite party. Avoidant negotiators don’t focus much on substance or relationships.

‍

‍

The two remaining styles of negotiation fall somewhere in the middle of balancing substance and relationship and these are known as compromising and collaborating negotiation styles. Compromising negotiators are often in search of a quick fix that benefits both parties in some way, often trying to “meet in the middle.” These negotiators may sacrifice some amount of their desired outcome for the sake of maintaining the relationship assuming the other party is willing to do the same. Finally, collaborative negotiators focus on finding creative ways to maximize outcomes for both parties, fostering success in substance and relationship elements of negotiation. This negotiation style is also characterized by optimizing long-term solutions and joint value over the quick-fixes and efficiency of the compromising style. Each style has its own benefits and appropriate contexts—for example, a one-and-done type negotiation wouldn’t require the same relationship care as a longer-term partnership might. In any case, being aware of your own style as well as noting that of your counterpart is helpful for successful negotiations. 

‍

‍

Approaches to negotiation

The styles detailed above can also fall into different types of approaches to entering a negotiation: hard, soft, and principled. Hard approaches to negotiation are common in competitive-style negotiators and involve a firm adherence to one’s desired outcome. Often, hard negotiations result in a lack of ability to reach compromise or a very one-sided result. They may be confrontational in nature and involve suspicion or threats towards the other parties involved; however, hard negotiations are not necessarily inherently negative—in instances in which a compromise isn’t advisable, there is nothing wrong with sticking to your guns. For example, people are less likely to reach a compromise when negotiations involve moral values or ethical standards (Steinel & Harinck, 2020). When finding a middle ground might involve some ethical concerns, sometimes it’s not a bad idea to be more rigid in your stance. On the other hand, confounding an outcome with unnecessary morality can make a valuable compromise more difficult, so it’s important to pick these battles wisely. On the other hand, soft approaches to negotiation tend to be similar to behaviors of accommodating negotiators; participants in the negotiation process are seen more as friends than competitors and the conversation is usually non-confrontational. Soft approaches also embody a sense of trust and willingness to extend offers or concede to counteroffers. When paired with a hard-approach negotiator, the softer party can sometimes end up overextending their end of the bargain and leave feeling taken advantage of. However, softer negotiations can be useful when paired together as well as in the context of a relationship that warrants preservation. 

‍

‍

The third approach to negotiation is principled, and this tends to be the most successful strategy when considering both parties. Principled negotiation often involves collaborative-style negotiators and is based upon four key concepts:

1. Separation of the problems from the people 
2. A focus on the overall interests of both parties rather than their specific positions
3. Use of objective criteria 
4. Seeking out creative solutions to optimize mutual benefit

Principled negotiation is useful in a wide variety of contexts and it can help negotiators to reach not only compromise, but fully collaborative solutions to problems or decisions. It considers not only the initial desired outcomes of both parties, but also what they hope to accomplish in the long-run as a result of the collaboration. Principled negotiation approaches often reduce the emotionality and bias in negotiation settings and strive to reach a conclusion that meets the needs of all involved (Heath & Isbell, 2020). 

7 Steps to Yes

1. Know your negotiation styles

When entering into a negotiation, it is important to understand not only how you negotiate, but also how your counterpart might approach the situation. Do they tend to be rigid or flexible? Competitive? Accommodating? Collaborative? Taking a moment to reflect on how these two styles (yours and theirs) might interact can be key to a successful negotiation. In a 2020 study examining the impact of reflection on negotiation found that out of 262 participants, those who were given training to enhance cognitive reflection in negotiation contexts experienced more individual benefit as well as a better joint outcome overall (Jeklic). Although you might not always know exactly how your counterpart tends to approach negotiation, being self-aware of your own tendencies as well as taking note of the behavior of others involved can be valuable in finding a solution that works well for both parties. 

‍

‍

2. Do your research 

Whether you’re asking for a raise, investing in a product, or requesting a service, understanding the value of each factor at play is incredibly important. Everyone has a sense of how much a good or service is worth to them, but it isn’t always clear when entering negotiation. When looking to spend time or money on something as the result of a negotiation, look into how much the item or project in question is usually worth. How much has it sold for in other cases? How much time should a project take? If you are looking for a salary increase, investigate the market value for someone in your position or with a similar level of responsibility as you. Knowing how much someone else might be willing to pay for your employment can be good evidence in favor of why you should be getting a raise. It can also be helpful to take note of how frequently and in what amounts your company gives out bonuses or increases in pay. Finding the right time (i.e. before the turn of a fiscal year, during or prior to an evaluation, etc.) and the right way to ask can set you up for a good outcome. A survey conducted in 2017 by Columbia University found that many employers are likely to consider a raise when given a range of options to choose from (“between 3-5%,” for example). If you can make a good case for your value and productivity and find a good time to ask, you’re likely to find success.

3. Take a principled approach  

Hard and soft negotiation approaches certainly have their place, but when it comes to instances of pay raise or market value, you’re likely going to want to walk away from the negotiation with something without sacrificing your bottom-line. In these cases, principled approaches to negotiation can be a great fit. Whereas a hard approach might leave you empty-handed for lack of compromise (while taking a soft approach might earn you the short end of the stick), a principled approach aims to find a collaborative compromise that leaves both parties feeling good about their agreement. Principled negotiation strategies are especially beneficial for maintaining relationships because they encourage the separation of the people involved from the issues or tasks at hand. When we conflate these two, we are often entering into negotiation with a sense of subjectivity that can lead to a bias in the outcome—biases of any kind can lead to hindrances in the negotiation process and unsatisfactory results (Galluccio & Beck, 2021). We may overvalue the relationship and be willing to overextend ourselves, or, on the other hand, place too much emphasis on the material gain and risk making a personal attack or damaging the relationship. Further, having a biased sense of the interaction may discourage us from communicating effectively. Studies have shown that in some cases, offering an apology amidst negotiation disputes can lead toward a more mutual benefit (Cheung, Zhu & Yu, 2020). Conflating counterparts with the problems with reaching agreement can in turn make them appear more adversarial and reduce the likelihood of an apology being offered when necessary. For this reason, working towards a principled approach is extremely beneficial. 

‍

‍

4. Employ and analyze BATNAs

Going into any negotiation, the possibility of “no” is inevitable. Knowing this, it’s important to have a backup plan; this is typically referred to as the BATNA, or best alternative to negotiation agreement. If you can’t get what you’re looking for out of a negotiation, what’s next? Both identifying and communicating your BATNA can work as leverage in a negotiation agreement—you don’t need to reach an agreement with this particular negotiator in order to obtain your desired results. Even if it isn’t your ideal solution, a BATNA allows you to exercise your boundaries and turn down an offer that doesn’t meet your needs. When considering both your own and your counterparts’ BATNAs, assessing the credibility and plausibility of this alternative can also act as leverage in and of itself. Studies have shown that not only possibility, but also likelihood of deferral to a BATNA can impact the performance of negotiators; the perception that one’s opponent (first) has a BATNA and (second) that said BATNA is a likely alternative makes a mutually favorable outcome more likely (Pinkley et al., 2017; 2019). 

5. Identify reservation values

Once you have an understanding of how to approach a negotiation based on style and principle and you’ve done some research to determine the market value for your position, an investment, or a service you are providing or seeking out, the next step is to decide your reservation value. This refers to the minimum you would accept as a raise/purchase price/rate for service as a “seller” or the maximum you’d be willing to spend for a raise/good/service. Determining your own limits can help avoid overextending your end of the deal or turning down an offer. If you can, identify the reservation values of your counterparts as well—this is valuable information because it shows the worth of the item or service in question to the party you are negotiating with. Once you have an understanding of these criteria and respective valuations, you are on to step 5. 

‍

‍

6. Consider the ZOPA

Between the reservation values of both parties exists the zone of possible agreement (ZOPA). Essentially, the ZOPA of any negotiation lies between the maximum one party is willing to spend or contribute and the minimum that the other will accept. Understanding where this zone falls sets useful guidelines navigating the give-and-take of the negotiation process. However, it is not uncommon for either party to avoid revealing their maximum or minimum in an effort to get the most out of a deal. In these cases, the ZOPA can be more difficult to identify. When the ZOPA is not apparent, this is often an opportunity to get creative—or rather, creativity becomes a necessity. Based in cognitive flexibility theory, a 2021 study found that greater mental fatigue led to less-creative solutions and, ultimately, poorer outcomes between negotiation dyads (Yao, Zhang & Liu). Keeping yourself sharp and ready to problem-solve for any negotiation, then, can be beneficial in reaching the sweet spot of a ZOPA. 

7. Exercise good communication practices 

At the end of the day, negotiating is a conversation. Though often more structured than a simple chat over coffee, communicating well is absolutely essential when it comes to successful negotiation. Throughout the entire process, be clear about what you are hoping to gain and pay attention to what your counterpart is saying and requesting—it could be the key to getting what you’re looking for instead of walking away defeated. First and foremost, emotional intelligence can play a huge role; if you approach your employer for a raise and they appear tired, stressed, or not in the mood to talk, you might be better off waiting. During negotiation, be cognizant of the tone and body language of yourself and others to make sure you’re giving off the right impression and to gauge their reactions. Alongside these nonverbal cues is, of course, the verbal message you are conveying. Be sure to use language that is objective and does not conflate your counterpart with the issue at hand. Additionally, understand that there are different ways that “no” can be used in a negotiation; there is the “tactical no” which is meant to elicit another offer from the other party, the “reset no” used in situations where no agreement can be reached by the present parties (may result in bringing in mediators, inviting other executives, changing representatives, etc.) and, finally, the “final no” at which point the negotiation is over and parties will turn to their BATNAS (Sebenius, 2017). Understanding how and when to use “no” can help move the negotiation forward constructively.  

‍

‍

Develop negotiation skills with LIFE Intelligence 

LIFE Intelligence is a one-stop personal and professional development app. It includes hundreds of science-backed lessons to hone your communication, decision-making, and conflict resolution skills, all of which are elements of negotiation. Based in cognitive behavioral therapy and designed to promote health in all areas of life (from career to relationships), the LIFE app offers a journey to self-awareness, emotional understanding, leadership skills, and more. For example, in Mission (topic) 2 (out of 9 core topics) you’ll practice self-awareness by reflecting on how you are perceived by yourself and others—a useful skill when considering negotiation styles. Mission 5 will teach you to catch your biases, account for uncertainty, and let go of sunk costs to improve your decision making skills and, consequently, hone your negotiation process. Finally, in Missions 8 and 9, you’ll develop skills in conflict resolution, communication, leadership, and influence to set yourself up for success in any negotiative endeavor.