Getting to Yes — Principled Negotiation Skill

"The reason you negotiate is to produce something better than the results you can obtain without negotiating." — Roger Fisher

Overview

Getting to Yes (예스를 이끌어내는 협상법) presents principled negotiation (원칙적 협상), developed at the Harvard Negotiation Project. It rejects the choice between "soft" (relationship-focused, yielding) and "hard" (position-focused, aggressive) negotiation, offering a third way: be SOFT on people and HARD on the problem.

Sub-commands

The Three Negotiation Styles

The 4 Principles

Principle 1: Separate the People from the Problem (사람과 문제를 분리하라)

Every negotiation has two dimensions: the substance (내용) and the relationship (관계). Most negotiators entangle them.

Three people problems:

1. Perception (인식)

• Each side sees what it wants to see
• Don't deduce their intentions from your fears
• Don't blame them for your problem
• Discuss each other's perceptions explicitly
• Give them a stake in the outcome by involving them in the process
• Make proposals consistent with their values (face-saving)

2. Emotion (감정)

• Recognize and understand emotions — yours and theirs
• Make emotions explicit: "I'm feeling frustrated. Are you?"
• Allow the other side to let off steam — don't react to emotional outbursts
• Use symbolic gestures (apology, acknowledgment, shared meal)

3. Communication (소통)

• Listen actively and acknowledge what is being said
• Speak to be understood, not to impress
• Speak about yourself, not about them ("I feel let down" not "You broke your word")
• Speak for a purpose — not everything needs to be said

Key technique — Build a working relationship: Before the negotiation starts, establish rapport. Once emotions rise, it's too late to build trust.

Principle 2: Focus on Interests, Not Positions (입장이 아닌 이해관계에 집중하라)

Position (입장): What someone SAYS they want — "I want $500K" Interest (이해관계): WHY they want it — security, fairness, recognition, autonomy

The classic example: Two sisters fight over an orange (positions). One wants the peel for baking, the other wants the juice. If they'd discussed interests, both could have 100%.

How to identify interests:

1. Ask "WHY?" — "Why do you want that?"
2. Ask "WHY NOT?" — "What would be wrong with this alternative?"
3. Realize each side has MULTIPLE interests
4. The most powerful interests are basic human needs:
   • Security (안전)
   • Economic well-being (경제적 안녕)
   • Sense of belonging (소속감)
   • Recognition (인정)
   • Control over one's life (자율성)

How to discuss interests:

• Make your interests vivid and specific — not "fairness" but "if I accept this, I'll lose $X per month"
• Acknowledge their interests as legitimate: "I understand that timeline matters to you"
• Be hard on the problem, soft on the people
• Look forward, not backward — "What should we do?" not "Who's to blame?"

Principle 3: Invent Options for Mutual Gain (상호 이익을 위한 선택지를 만들어라)

Most negotiations fail because people see the pie as fixed. Expand the pie first.

Four obstacles to creative options:

1. Premature judgment — Evaluating ideas kills generation
2. Searching for the single answer — There's always more than one solution
3. Assumption of a fixed pie — "More for you = less for me"
4. Thinking that solving their problem is their problem — You should help solve BOTH sides' problems

Techniques to generate options:

Brainstorming session rules (브레인스토밍 규칙):

1. Separate inventing from deciding — no criticism during generation
2. Broaden the options — don't look for a single answer
3. Search for mutual gains — identify shared interests
4. Make their decision easy — what would they say yes to?

The Circle Chart (원형 차트):

Step 1: PROBLEM — What's wrong? (symptoms)
Step 2: ANALYSIS — What are the causes? (diagnosis)
Step 3: APPROACHES — What strategies could address the causes? (theoretical solutions)
Step 4: ACTION IDEAS — What specific steps could be taken? (practical proposals)

Dovetailing interests (이해관계 맞물리기):

• Different interests can be complementary, not conflicting
• They value A more, you value B more → trade A for B
• Different risk tolerance → one takes more risk for more reward
• Different time preferences → short-term vs long-term tradeoff

Principle 4: Insist on Objective Criteria (객관적 기준을 고집하라)

When interests conflict, use objective standards rather than a contest of will.

Types of objective criteria:

• Market value (시장 가치)
• Precedent (선례)
• Scientific judgment (과학적 판단)
• Professional standards (전문가 기준)
• Costs (원가)
• Moral standards (도덕적 기준)
• Tradition (관행)
• Reciprocity (상호성)
• Court ruling (법원 판결)
• Equal treatment (동등 대우)

Types of fair procedures:

• Taking turns (순번제)
• Drawing lots (제비뽑기)
• Letting someone else decide (제3자 결정)
• "One cuts, the other chooses" (한 사람이 자르고, 다른 사람이 선택)

How to use objective criteria:

1. Frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria
2. Ask: "What's your basis for that?" / "How did you arrive at that figure?"
3. Reason and be open to reason
4. Never yield to pressure, only to principle

BATNA — Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (합의 불발 시 최선의 대안)

The single most important concept in negotiation. Your BATNA is your power.

Why BATNA matters:

• Protects you from accepting a deal that's too unfavorable
• Protects you from rejecting a deal you should accept
• The better your BATNA, the more negotiating power you have

Developing your BATNA:

1. List all alternatives if negotiations fail
2. Improve the most promising alternatives — make them real
3. Select the best one — this is your BATNA
4. Evaluate the other side's BATNA — it tells you their power
5. Never reveal your BATNA unless it's very strong

ZOPA — Zone of Possible Agreement (합의 가능 영역):

Your BATNA ──────[====ZOPA====]────── Their BATNA
          Your          Their
          reservation    reservation
          point          point

If your reservation point (walk-away price) is WORSE than theirs, there's a ZOPA. If not, no deal should be made.

Advanced Techniques

The One-Text Procedure (단일 텍스트 절차)

When multiple parties can't agree, a mediator (or one side) creates a single draft:

1. Ask all sides about their interests (not positions)
2. Write a draft that addresses all interests as best as possible
3. Show it to each side: "What's wrong with this?" (not "Do you agree?")
4. Revise based on criticism
5. Repeat until no further improvements can be made
6. Present the final text: "This is the best I can do. Accept or reject."

Used in the Camp David Accords (1978). 23 drafts. It worked.

Negotiation Jujitsu (협상 유도술)

When the other side uses hard bargaining tactics:

1. Don't push back — redirect their energy
2. Don't attack their position — look behind it for interests
3. Don't defend your ideas — invite criticism: "What's wrong with this approach?"
4. Ask questions instead of making statements
5. Use silence — people are uncomfortable with it and will fill it

Dealing with Dirty Tricks (더러운 수법 대처)

Output Format

When analyzing a negotiation situation:

## Principled Negotiation Analysis

**Situation:** [description]

### People vs Problem
- Perception issues: ___
- Emotional dynamics: ___
- Communication gaps: ___
- Relationship strategy: ___

### Positions → Interests
| Party | Position (what they say) | Interests (why) |
|---|---|---|
| My side | ___ | ___ |
| Their side | ___ | ___ |

### Shared / Compatible Interests
- ___

### Options for Mutual Gain
1. ___
2. ___
3. ___
(dovetailing opportunities: ___)

### Objective Criteria
- Standard 1: ___
- Standard 2: ___
- Fair procedure: ___

### BATNA Analysis
| | My Side | Their Side |
|---|---|---|
| BATNA | ___ | ___ |
| Reservation point | ___ | ___ |
| ZOPA exists? | ___ | |

### Recommended Approach
[Strategy summary with specific talking points]

Anti-patterns

1. Positional bargaining — Anchoring to a number and haggling. Wastes time, damages relationships, produces arbitrary outcomes.
2. No BATNA preparation — Negotiating without knowing your alternatives is negotiating blind.
3. Confusing interests with positions — "I want the corner office" (position) vs. "I need to feel valued and have a quiet space to focus" (interests).
4. Fixed pie assumption — Assuming what benefits one side must hurt the other. Always look for trades.
5. Yielding to pressure — Accepting a deal because they pushed hard, not because it meets your interests.
6. Revealing a weak BATNA — "We really need this deal" destroys your power.
7. Attacking people, not problems — "You're being unreasonable" instead of "This proposal doesn't address my safety concern."
8. Premature evaluation — Shooting down options during brainstorming kills creativity.
9. Single-issue focus — Negotiating only price when scope, timeline, payment terms, and other variables could all be traded.
10. Ignoring relationship — Winning the deal but destroying the relationship. Long-term value comes from ongoing collaboration.

References

• getting-to-yes/references/principled-negotiation.md — Framework summary and checklists
• Roger Fisher & William Ury, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (3rd ed., 2011)
• William Ury, Getting Past No: Negotiating in Difficult Situations (1993)
• Roger Fisher & Daniel Shapiro, Beyond Reason: Using Emotions as You Negotiate (2005)
• Harvard Program on Negotiation: https://www.pon.harvard.edu