Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In
by Roger Fisher, William L. Ury, and Bruce Patton
Contents
Questions About Fairness and “Principled” Negotiation
Overview
The chapter addresses three fairness-focused FAQs. It explains when positional bargaining might be acceptable, why using objective criteria still helps even when parties favor different standards, and how to assess windfalls that feel unfair. The guidance emphasizes wiser outcomes, relationship preservation, long-term durability, and the value of a fair-dealing reputation.
Summary
The authors begin by asking whether positional bargaining ever makes sense. While principled negotiation usually yields better outcomes, they note exceptions where simple haggling may suffice: single-issue deals among strangers with low stakes and high transaction costs. They urge assessing stakes, complexity, relationship importance, counterpart expectations, and timing—favoring joint problem-solving, interests, and standards especially when outcomes, relationships, or precedents matter.
They highlight contexts with entrenched adversarial habits, such as labor-management bargaining, where shifting to problem-solving may require a multi-cycle transition. Examples include General Motors and the United Auto Workers taking several contracts to change negotiation structures. The authors advise clarifying interests and standards before positional trades to avoid “leaving gold on the table.”
Next, they address differing standards of fairness. Even without a single “right” answer, external benchmarks improve outcomes, ease concessions, and vary in persuasiveness based on relevance and acceptance. A young lawyer’s salary negotiation illustrates selecting on-point, current, local market data over outdated or irrelevant figures. When standards conflict, parties can narrow gaps, trade off, or use fair procedures (coin flip, arbitration, splitting differences).
Finally, they consider whether to be fair when you need not be. The book is pragmatic, not moralizing, but warns that windfalls above what seems fair carry risks: overestimating cleverness, non-durable agreements, enforcement problems, damaged relationships, reputational loss, and later regret. They suggest weighing the value of the excess against these costs and, where possible, restructuring so the other side perceives reciprocity rather than exploitation.
Illustrative examples reinforce these points: choosing objective depth standards for building foundations, exploring interests even in unique-item bargaining, and the tourist who tricked a family selling a rug and later felt revulsion. The chapter’s throughline: use objective criteria and principled methods to secure durable, wise agreements while protecting relationships and one’s reputation.
Who Appears
- Young lawyerCandidate negotiating salary; advocates current, local market standards to define fairness.
- Hiring partnerLaw firm representative proposing outdated or irrelevant salary benchmarks, prompting standards debate.
- General Motors (GM)Example of a party needing multiple bargaining cycles to shift from adversarial to problem-solving.
- United Auto Workers (UAW)Union counterpart illustrating gradual transition away from entrenched positional bargaining.
- Tourist rug buyerBuyer who exploits worthless currency, later suffering remorse and reputational cautionary lesson.
- House builderExample showing the need for objective standards when stakes like foundation depth are high.
- Antique dealerCounterpart in a one-of-a-kind purchase where exploring interests and options still helps.