Getting To Yes: Insist on Using Objective Criteria [ARR]

I don’t know if you have been thinking this while reading these posts, but I’ve been thinking, “Yes. That’s all well and good but at the end of the day, the two parties still have interests that conflict!” This chapter, Insist on Using Objective Criteria, will address that.

Deciding on the basis of will is costly.  If trying to settle differences of interest on the basis of will has such high costs, the solution is to negotiate on some basis independent of the will of either side – that is, on the basis of objective criteria.

The case for using objective criteria. You want the rent to be lower, the landlord wants it to be higher. Why not insist that a negotiated price, for example, be based on some standard such as market value, replacement cost, depreciated book value, or competitive prices instead of whatever the seller demands?

Principled negotiation produces wise agreements amicably and efficiently. People using objective criteria tend to use time more efficiently talking about possible standards and solutions versus defending their position.

Insist on Using Objective
Criteria

Fair standards. Of course, in order to use objective criteria, you need to have objective criteria! Like most things, it is beneficial to prepare in advance. Develop some alternative standards before the negotiation begins and think through their application to your case. An agreement may be based upon:

Market Value                     What a court would decide

Precedent                           Moral Standards

Scientific judgment              Equal treatment

Professional standards         Tradition

Efficiency                            Reciprocity

Costs

You can use the test of reciprocal application to tell you whether a proposed criteria is fair and independent of either party’s will. For example, if a real estate agency selling you a house offers a standard form contract, you would be wise to ask if that is the same standard form they use when they buy a house.

Fair procedures. To resolve a conflict, you can either use fair standards or fair procedures. For example, when two children split a piece of cake, one cuts and the other chooses.  As you consider procedural solutions, look at other basic means of settling differences: taking turns, drawing lots, letting someone else decide, and so on.

Now that we have the objective criteria – let’s use it! But how do you go about discussing them with the other side?

There are three basic points to remember:

1. Frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria
-Ask “What’s your Theory?”  If you are interested in purchasing a house and the seller names their price, ask them, “How did you arrive at that figure?”
-Agree first on principles. Each standard the other side proposes becomes a lever you can use to then persuade them. Your case will have more impact if it is presented in terms of their criteria.

2. Reason and be open to reason as to which standards are most appropriate and how they should be applied
-Throwing around the phrase, “It’s a matter of principle” when you disagree with your negotiating partner, is not what is meant by principled negotiation.  A principled negotiator is open to reasoned persuasion on the merits; a positional bargainer is not.

3. Never yield to pressure, only to principle
-Pressure can take on many forms: a bribe, a threat, a manipulative appeal to trust, or a simple refusal to budge. In all these cases, the principled response is the same: invite them to state their reasoning, suggest objective criteria you think apply, and refuse to budge except on this basis.

Next week, we will look into the chapter called “Yes, But” which reviews how to apply these principles when unexpected curve balls are thrown your way.