Focus on interests, not positions
Ask why a position is taken — the underlying interest is almost always more negotiable than the stated demand.
Why it works
Positions are specific demands ("I need $80,000"); interests are the underlying needs that motivate them ("I need to cover my rent and feel valued"). Two positions in direct conflict may serve compatible interests. Shifting the conversation from positions to interests creates the possibility of solutions that satisfy both parties’s real needs — often more creatively than either side’s original position would allow.
How to do it
- Ask "why?" and "what for?" repeatedly — not as a challenge but as genuine inquiry into what is driving the position.
- State your own interests explicitly rather than only your position: "What I really need here is..."
- List the interests on both sides before generating any solutions — solutions come after interests are understood.
Evidence
Distinguishing positions from interests is the cornerstone of integrative bargaining research. Laboratory studies consistently show that information exchange about interests enables logrolling and higher joint outcomes. Pruitt & Lewis (1975) demonstrated experimentally that a problem-solving orientation toward underlying interests, rather than positional bargaining, produced more integrative (jointly beneficial) agreements. (rct)
Interest exploration requires trust and some disclosure. In low-trust or highly adversarial settings, revealing true interests can be exploited; the principle is sound but context-dependent in application.
Sources
- Thompson (1991), "Information exchange in negotiation", Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
- Thompson, L. L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27(2), 161-179.
- Pruitt, D. G., & Lewis, S. A. (1975). Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 621-633.
Common mistake
Accepting the first stated position as the real constraint and generating solutions that all address that position — you may be trying to solve the wrong problem.
Practice this with IX Coach
7 days free, then $40/month (~$1.30/day).
More practices for Principled Negotiation, Made Practical
- Separate the people from the problem
Address relationship concerns and substantive issues in different registers — treating people well and the problem hard.
- Invent options for mutual gain before selecting
Generate multiple creative options without commitment before evaluating any — the solution space is usually larger than the initial positions suggest.
- Insist on objective criteria to evaluate options
Agree on an independent standard — market rate, precedent, expert opinion — before applying it to the specific deal.
- Frame proposals as "yesable propositions"
Make your proposals easy for the counterpart to say yes to — not easy on your terms, but easy to accept as legitimate.
- Acknowledge emotions explicitly in negotiation
Name what you see the other side feeling — it reduces defensive heat and keeps the substantive conversation workable.
Related concepts
- BATNA: Your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement
Walk-away power, realistic alternatives, and why your BATNA is your negotiating power
- ZOPA: The Zone of Possible Agreement
Mapping the deal space, identifying overlap, and knowing when no deal is the right outcome
- Never Split the Difference, In Practice
The FBI hostage-negotiation toolkit, with the mechanism behind each move
- Nonviolent Communication (NVC), Made Practical
The four components, the mechanisms behind them, and an honest read on the evidence