http://www.sina.com.cn 2008年02月13日 14:30
At the Harvard Negotiation Project, we have been developing a new method of negotiation explicitly designed to produce good results efficiently and amicably. This method, called principled negotiation or negotiation on the merits, can be boiled down to four basic points.
1. The first point recognizes that human beings are not computers. People have strong emotions, often see things very differently, and do not always communicate clearly. In negotiation it often happens that emotions get mixed up with the objective rights and wrongs of the situation. Taking up a fixed position makes this worse because people’s personalities become identified with their positions. So before the actual negotiation begins, we need to distinguish between personal differences and differences over solutions to the problem.
2. The second point distinguishes between what people say they want, their stated positions, and what they really want, their underlying interests. Negotiating positions often hide what you really want. A compromise between two positions is not likely to produce an agreement which satisfies the needs underlying each position.
3. The third point acknowledges the problem of having to find a perfect solution while you’re under pressure. Making up your mind in the presence of your opponent restricts your ideas. Deciding on something very important or trying to find the perfect answer limits creative thought. You can get around these limitations by arranging a set amount of time to think up a wide range of possible solutions which help both sides and creatively bring them together.
4. When both sides find that their interests are directly opposed, one negotiator may try to win simply by being stubborn. However, you can respond to such tactics by insisting that his opinion alone is not enough and that some fair independent standard is needed. This does not mean that you yourself select the independent standard, rather that both of you decide on one, such as market value, expert opinion, or law. By discussing such criteria, neither side needs to give in to the other.