How to identify and focus on the underlying interests in a negotiation? - Chapter 3

Why is it better to focus on the underlying interests instead of on the positions?

The underlying interests of the participants are the desires and concerns that cause their positions. For example: “I want fresh air” is the underlying interest of the position “I want that the window is open”. It is better to reconcile the underlying interests of the participants for two reasons. Firstly because for every interest there are usually several possible positions that could satisfy it. People often adopt the most obvious position which can have a very limited way of being accepted by the other, but looking behind the opposed positions for the motivating interests, there are often alternative positions that meet the interests of both participants. Secondly, behind opposed positions are often many more interests than just the conflicting ones.

How to identify the underlying interests?

Underlying interests are more complicated than their often clear and explicit positions. Underlying interests can be unexpressed, intangible, and even inconsistent. The following techniques may be helpful in clarifying the underlying interests of the participants:

• Ask yourself why the other has taken its position and also why they are not going along with the decision that you are asking for. It is acceptable to explicitly ask the other this, as long as you make clear you are looking for understanding (not justification).
• Analyze the consequences of agreeing or refusing to make the decision that you are asking for, as seen by the other side. What would be the (long-term and short-term) impact on the person and the group they may represent?
• Be aware that each side may have multiple interests. One person may have several interests himself, but also within one side of the negotiation may be other people and influences present.
• Basic human needs are the most powerful interests. Basic human needs are security, economic well-being, a sense of belonging, control over one's life, and recognition. Taking care of these basic needs increases the chances of an agreement and of both sides keeping to it.

What is the best way of making your own intentions clear?

• One recommendation is to be clear and specific, as concrete details make a description credible and add impact.
• It is acceptable to take a strong stance, as long as it does not make the other side feel you believe their interests are illegitimate or unimportant. You should make clear that the problem legitimately needs attention, without launching a personal attack on the other.
• It helps to acknowledge and appreciate the other's interests. It will likely cause the other side to have more understanding for your interests as well.
• It is recommended to put the problem before the answer. Instead of starting out with what you want from the other side, it is better to first describe your experience of the problem so that they other side may understand where you are coming from and why you will be asking for what will be your position.

Why should you look forward and not back?

Your interests will be more satisfied if you talk about where you would like to go, instead of talking about where you have come from. In many negotiations there is a cause, but not a purpose. They tend to be more about what someone has said or done rather than the pursuit of long-term interests. Instead of asking for a justification of what happened in the past, it is better to talk about how you would like things to be done in the future.

What is meant with illustrative specificity?

Illustrative specificity refers to remaining flexible with regards to the specific options that have developed out of the identified interests. Each formulated option should be simply illustrative and you should think of more than one option that may be meet your interests. An open mind is not the same as an empty mind and you can go into meetings prepared with several options that may satisfy your interests.

How can cognitive dissonance help in separating the people from the problem?

According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, people dislike inconsistency and will act to eliminate it. By giving positive support to the person on the other side, while at the same time being strong about your interests, you create cognitive dissonance for the other. To overcome this dissonance, the other will be tempted to dissociate himself from the problem and be more likely to cooperate with you. It seems inconsistent to be supportive and strong at the same time, but it will increase the pressure for an effective solution, while improving the relationship and increasing the likelihood of reaching an agreement.