All of us are involved in negotiating for something on a fairly frequent basis, and over and over again, most of us make the same critical mistake. We reduce the negotiation to a battle of wills over positions (I want/You want) and we try and brute force our way to a conclusion. For many situations, there’s a better way.
There are at least two major perspectives on negotiation that I’ve encountered. One says quite clearly that in a negotiation you are duty-bound to secure the absolute best possible outcome for your firm. The implication of this approach is of course that a negotiation is a boxing match, with the bigger, stronger athlete not just winning, but also destroying the opponent. The other emphasizes understanding the interests of the all parties and crafting something that meets those interests in an equitable manner.
