Coaching practices for Both Sides of a Strategy
Describe almost anything you are working through and IX Coach finds the practices whose real-world fit is closest. For Both Sides of a Strategy, these are the strongest matches in the current practice library.
Does this sound like the set of challenges you might be facing?
- I’ve planned this whole move as if our competitor will just sit there and take it
- The other side keeps coming at me hard
- We’ve got several things on the table and we keep splitting each one right down the middle, leaving us both half-satisfied on everything
- Everyone swears this approach is the right one and on paper it clearly is, but it just feels subtly off when I do it, like it’s cut against my grain
- I’m walking into this assuming it’s a fixed pie where their win is my loss, and I’ve only ever thought through my own side
Practices that may help
- Simulate the adversary’s response to your move
Assign someone to genuinely think and plan as your competitor, not just describe them.
Red Teaming: Stress-Testing Plans Before They Fail - Negotiation jujitsu
When they attack your position, don’t push back — redirect the force toward the problem.
Getting to Yes: Principled Negotiation - Trade across differing priorities
Give on what you value less to get what you value more — and have them do the same.
Win-Win Thinking: Expanding the Pie - Align your strategy with your regulatory focus for "regulatory fit"
When your strategy matches your regulatory focus, the task feels more right and performance improves.
Regulatory Focus Theory: Promotion vs Prevention Thinking - Map interests for both sides before generating solutions
Write down both parties’ known and inferred interests before proposing anything — the map reveals trades that no single position could.
Interests vs. Positions: The Core of Integrative Negotiation - Identify compatible interests for joint gain
When both sides care about the same thing — quality, reputation, timing — agreements that serve that shared interest outperform splits.
Interests vs. Positions: The Core of Integrative Negotiation - Find mutual purpose
Establish a shared goal both people care about so the conversation is "us vs the problem".
Crucial Conversations, Made Practical - Steelman the strategy opposite to the successful one
Before adopting a lesson from a success story, build the best possible case for the opposite approach.
Survivorship Bias: Learning from What You Can’t See - Make multiple equivalent simultaneous offers (MESOs)
Propose several package deals of equal value to you — see which the other side prefers.
Expanding the Pie: Negotiation Beyond Splitting the Difference - Probe for interests, not positions
Ask why the other side wants what they say they want before responding to what they say.
Expanding the Pie: Negotiation Beyond Splitting the Difference
Related concerns
- Shared Interests Deal Making
When both sides care about the same thing — quality, reputation, timing — agreements that serve that shared interest outperform splits.
Identify compatible interests for joint gain
- Trade Across Issues
Give the counterpart what they care most about; get what you care most about — logrolling is only possible when interests differ.
Trade across issues where each side has different priorities
- When Circle Process Centerpiece Intention
Establish a shared goal both people care about so the conversation is "us vs the problem".
Find mutual purpose
- When Win Win Thinking Trade On Differences
Give on what you value less to get what you value more — and have them do the same.
Trade across differing priorities
- Add Issues Negotiation
When you’re stuck on a single issue, adding more issues often creates room for trades that satisfy both sides.
Expand the ZOPA by adding issues to the negotiation
- Compatible Interests Negotiation
When both sides care about the same thing — quality, reputation, timing — agreements that serve that shared interest outperform splits.
Describe your situation in your own words to search the complete practice library.