CHAPTER TWO

NEGOTIATION: STRATEGIZING, FRAMING, AND PLANNING

Overview
In this chapter, discussion of what negotiators should do before opening negotiations will
be examined. It is believed that effective strategizing, planning, and preparation are the
most critical precursors for achieving negotiation objectives. Planning and strategizing
begins by exploring the broad process of strategy development, starting with defining the
negotiator’s goals/objectives. Understanding the process of developing a strategy to
achieve those goals, the issue at stake, and exploration of how the definition of those
issues may change over the course of a negotiation will be covered. The typical stages
and phases of an evolving negotiation, and how understanding they may affect planning
will be covered. Finally, the critical steps involved in creating a plan to execute a
strategy are discussed.
2.1 GOALS – The objectives that drive a negotiation strategy
The first step in developing and executing a negotiation strategy is to determine one’s
goals.
 The preparation must include attention to substantive items including goals, goal
priorities, and multi goal packages.
 Procedural concerns dealing with agendas and bargaining histories.
 Effective preparation requires a thorough, thoughtful approach to these items:
negotiators should specify their goals and objectives clearly.
 Direct effects of goals on choice of strategy
 Wishes are not goals, especially in negotiation.
 Our goals are often linked to the other party’s goals.
 There are boundaries or limits to what our goals can be.
 Effective goals must be concrete or specific, and preferably measurable.
 Indirect effects of goals on choice of strategy.
 The pursuit of a singular, substantive goal often tends to support the choice of a
competitive strategy. Goals that are complex or difficult to define may require
initiating a sequence of negotiation episodes.
2.2 STRATEGY-THE OVERALL PLAN TO ACHIEVE ONE’S GOALS
Strategy, Tactics, or Planning
Tactics are short-term, adaptive moves designed to enact or pursue broad (or higher-
level) strategies, which in turn provide stability, continuity, and direction for tactical
behaviors. Tactics are subordinate to strategy: they are structured, directed, and driven by
strategic considerations. The planning process takes in all the considerations and choices
that parties in a negotiation make about tactics, resource use, and contingent responses in
pursuit of the overall strategy.
Strategic options-vehicles for achieving goals

1|Page
Alternative situational strategies: Four types of initial strategies for negotiators:
competition, collaboration, accommodation, and avoidance.
1. Avoidance: the non-engagement strategy: If one is able to meet one’s needs
without negotiating at all, it may make sense to use an avoidance strategy. It simply
may not be worth the time and effort to negotiate (although there are sometimes
reasons to negotiate in such situations. The decision to negotiate is closely related to
the desirability of available alternatives the outcomes that can be achieved if
negotiations don’t work out.
2. Active-engagement strategies: competition, collaboration, and accommodation
a) Competition is the distributive or win-lose bargaining
b) Collaboration is integrative or win-win negotiation
c) Accommodation is much a win-lose strategy as competition, although it has a
decidedly different image it involves an imbalance of outcomes, but in the
opposite direction.

Substantive outcome important

Relational Yes No
outcome Yes Collaboration Accommodation
important? No Competition Avoidance

Table 2.1 Dual Concern model

2.3 Defining the issues – the process of ‘framing’ the problem
Framing is determining what issues are at stake. Framing is about focusing, shaping,
organizing the world around us. Frames emerge as the parties talk about their preferences
and priorities; they allow the parties to begin to develop a shared or common definition of
the issues related to a situation, and a process for resolving them.
Why frames are critical to understanding strategy. There is general agreement that people
often use frames to define problems. Frames are inevitable; one cannot “avoid” framing.
Frames can also be shaped by the type of information that is chosen, or the setting and
context in which the information is presented.
Types of frames
a) Substantive:-what the conflict is about
b) Outcome: what predispositions the party has to achieving a specific result or
outcome from the negotiation
c) Aspiration: what predispositions the party has toward satisfying a broader set of
interests or needs in negotiation
d) Conflict management process: how the parties will go about resolving their
dispute
e) Identity: how the parties define “who they are”

2|Page
 f) Characterization: how the parties define the other parties
g) Loss-gain how the parties view the risk associated with particular outcomes
Another approach to frames: interests, rights, and power
a) Interests: people are often concerned about what they need, desire or want
b) Rights: people may also be concerned about who is “right”
c) Power: people may also wish to resolve a negotiation on the basis of power
The frame of an issue changes as the negotiation evolves
 The issue development approach focuses on the patterns of change
(transformation) that occur in the issues as parties communicate with each other.
 Several factors shape a frame, the negotiation context clearly affects the way both
sides define the issue and conversations that the parties have with each other
about the issues in the bargaining mix.
At least four factors can affect how the conversation is shaped:
 Negotiators tend to argue for stock issues, or concerns that are raised every time
the parties negotiate
 Each party attempts to make the best possible case for his or her preferred
position or perspective
 In a more “macro” sense, frames may also define major shifts and transitions in
the overall negotiation
 Multiple agenda items operate to shape the issue development frames
Reframing is dynamic process that may occur many times in conversation. It comes as
parties challenge each other, as they present their own case or refute the other’s, or as
they search for ways to reconcile seemingly incompatible perspectives.
2.4 Understanding the flow of negotiations; stages and phases
There are seven key steps to an ideal negotiation process:
1) Preparation: deciding what is important, defining goals, thinking ahead how to
work together with the other party
2) Relationship building: getting to know the other party, understanding how you
and the other are similar and different, and building commitment toward
achieving a mutually beneficial set of outcomes
3) Information gathering: learning what you need to know about the issues, about
the other party and their needs, about the feasibility of possible settlements, and
about what might happen if you fail to reach agreement with the other side
4) Information using: at this stage, negotiators assemble the case they want to make
for their preferred outcomes and settlement, one that will maximize the
negotiator’s own needs.
5) Bidding: the process of making moves from one’s initial, ideal position to the
actual outcome.
6) Closing the deal: the objective here is to build commitment to the agreement
achieved in the previous phase.

3|Page
 7) Implementing the agreement: determining who needs to do what once hands are
shaken and the documents signed.
2.4 Getting ready to implement the strategy: The Planning Process
The dominant force for success in negotiation is in the planning that takes place prior to
the dialogue. Effective planning requires hard work on several fronts:
1. Defining the issues: Usually, a negotiation involves one or two major issues and
several minor issues. In negotiation, a complete list of the issues at stake is best
derived from the following sources: 1) an analysis of the overall situation, 2) our
own experience in similar situations, 3) research conducted to gather information,
4) consultation with experts.
2. Assembling issues and defining the bargaining mix: After assembling issues on an
agenda, the negotiator must prioritize them. Prioritization includes two steps:
a. Determine which issues are important and which are less important
b. Determine whether the issues are connected or separate.
3. Defining interests. Interest may include:
- Substantive: directly related to the focal issues under negotiation.
- Process-based: related to the manner in which the negotiators settle the
dispute.
- Relationship-based: tied to the current or desired future relationship between
the parties.
4. Defining limits. Good preparation requires that you establish two clear points:
a. Limits - are the point where you decide that you should stop the
negotiation rather than continue, because any settlement beyond this
points us not minimally acceptable.
b. Alternatives-are other deals negotiators could achieve and still meet their
needs. In any situation, the better your alternatives, the more power you
have, because you can walk away from the deal in front of you and still
know that you can have your needs and interests met.
5. Defining one’s own objectives and opening bids. There are numerous ways to set
a target. Targets may not be as firm and rigid as limits or alternatives; one might
be able to set a general range, or a class of several outcomes that would be equally
acceptable. Similarly, there are numerous ways to set an opening bid. An opening
may be the best possible outcome, an ideal solution, something even better than
was achieved last time.
- Target setting requires positive thinking about one’s own objectives.
- Target setting often requires considering how to package several issues and
objectives.
- Target setting requires an understanding of trade-offs and throwaways.
6. Defining the constituent to whom one is accountable: Constituents – bosses,
parties who make the final decision, parties who will have and critique the

4|Page
 solution achieved. Moreover, there may be a number of observers to the
negotiation who will also watch and critique the negotiation. Finally, negotiation
occurs in a context – a social system of laws, customs, common business
practices, natural norms, and political cross-pressures.
7. Understanding the other party and its interests and objective: There are several
key pieces of background information that will be of great importance:

- The other party’s current resources, interests, and needs.

- The other party’s objectives.
- The other party’s reputation and negotiation style.
- The other party’s alternatives.
- The other party’s authority to make agreement.
- The other party’s likely strategy and tactics.
8. Selecting a strategy. the negotiator should clearly determine which strategy he/she
intends to pursue.
9. Planning the issue presentation and defense – how will I present the issues to the
other party.? One important aspect of actual negotiations is to present a case
clearly and to marshal ample supporting facts and argument; another is to refute
the other party’s agreements with counterargument.
10. Defining protocol – where and when the negotiation will occur, who will be there,
agenda, etc. There are a number of elements of “protocol” or process that a
negotiator should consider:
- Agenda. A negotiator may unilaterally draw up a firm list of issues, and even
establish specific goals, well before the initial negotiation meeting. This
process is valuable because it forces the bargainer to think through his or her
position and decide on objectives.
- The location of negotiation. Negotiators tend to do better on their home turf
(field) – their own office, building, or city. If negotiators want to minimize in
which advantage that comes with home turf, then they need to select neutral
territory in which neither party will have an advantage. Such as, held in
conference rooms or hotel meeting room (Formal deliberations); held in
restaurants, cocktail lounges, or room that offers an array of furniture
(Informal deliberations).
- The time period of negotiation. If negotiators expect long, protracted
deliberations, they might want to negotiate the time and duration of sessions.
- Other parties who might be involved in the negotiation.
- What might be done if negotiation fails?
- How will we keep track of what is agreed to?

5|Page