A Dispute Resolution or Deal Making

Negotiation?
We now continue with our look at preparing for negotiation by asking the question. 
Is this a dispute resolution type negotiation or a deal-making type negotiation. So in other words,
once you've decided to go down the path of yes, you're gonna to negotiate. It's important to step
back and ask, am I negotiating the resolution of a dispute or am I making a deal? 
A while ago, there was an article published by Frank Sander and Jeff Rubin called, The Janus
Quality of Negotiations, which gave a very clear perspective on the difference between dispute
resolution negotiation and deal making negotiation. 
Frank Sander by the way, is one of the fathers of alternative dispute resolution,  ADR which we're
gonna be talking about in a few minutes. He's a friend of mine who teaches at the Harvard Law
School. In fact, he invited me to teach for a week in his course once and that he's a true pioneer in
the field of dispute resolution. And Frank and Jeff in their article, clearly noted that when you're
making a deal, you tend to be forward looking. It's the face of the Roman God Janus that's looking to
the future. You're forward looking, you tend to be focused on interest of the parties, or at least you
should be and on problem solving. Where as if you're the face of the God Janus looking toward the
past and trying to resolve a dispute, you're looking backward, you're more positional and the
negotiations tend to be more adversarial ‫ خصمانه‬. So it's very important from the outset to think about
this distinction. However, even when you're dealing with the dispute resolution negotiation, 
you should be thinking, how can I focus on the interests of the parties to make a larger pie to
develop a solution that benefits both sides? For example, in my course in Ann Arbor at the University
of Michigan,I give my students a scenario involving a real-life conflict between a software 
company and a licensee who had acquired a license to some of the company's software and then try
to develop the software and sell it on their own. So basically, it was an intellectual property dispute
and a very contentious dispute. Well, what many students discovered in wrestling ‫کشمکش‬with this
dispute,  is that, actually there was an opportunity for the licensee and the software company  to form
a joint venture ‫ مشارکت‬, which was beneficial to both sides. And so, even though you're in the dispute
resolution side, try to think of opportunities for an interest-based negotiation.Now, if you are on the
dispute side, you're trying to resolve a dispute. There are a number of processes that you can use in
addition to negotiation for resolving the dispute and let's take a look at some of these processes. 
Here's an example of a recent dispute at my university. Students at my university love basketball
and when there's an important game, they will wait in line for many hours to try to obtain tickets. 
And so, recently on a February morning, a line of students developed, they began forming the line at
4:00 AM in the morning, on a very cold morning.Around 7:00 AM, another line of students developed
and there was an argument as to which line was in the right place. And the students who arrived at
seven argued that the students who were waiting since four had to go the back of the other line. And
this led to a big dispute. They had to call in University Police. Here's the basic scenario, 4:00 AM, the
students began forming the line, 7:00 AM other students formed a second line. And my question to
you is, when we have this type of dispute, what processes do we as human beings use to resolve
this type of dispute? Please hit pause. Think about this for a second and write down a list of
processes that might be possible for resolving this dispute or any dispute, any personal dispute or
any business dispute. I'll give you a hint there are six main processes, 
try to see if you could come up with at least five of those six. So hit pause and then we'll continue.
Here's a spectrum ‫ طیف‬showing the six main processes. You can start on the right hand side,
Avoidance .One line of students might simply say to the other line of students, okay, you win. 
We're not gonna challenge you, we'll move to the back of your line. 
That's avoidance. The second of course, is Negotiation. Which is used for both deal making and
dispute resolution.A third process is Mediation, which involves bringing in a third party to mediate the
dispute. A mediation is a negotiation, but it is a negotiation assisted by a third party. A fourth
possibility is Arbitration ‫ داوری‬. Bringing in a third party, but in this case the third party has the right to
decide the dispute. Which is also true of Litigation. So arbitration and litigation are very similar. And
later in this course, we're gonna look at them in more details, especially arbitration. I'll show you a
video clip of an arbitration. But for now, think of arbitration as simply a private form of litigation. And
then finally we've got the power option. The students could begin fighting with each other, pushing
back and forth to determine who would be at the head of the line. In this particular case, what
happened is that they used a combination of mediation and arbitration. First of all, the police came
in. And as arbitrators, ordered the students from one line, the students waiting since 4 o'clock, to the
back of the other line.Then, a representative of the athletic‫ ورزش‬department came out, and acted as
a mediator trying to mediate a resolution and actually came up with some additional tickets to satisfy
both sides. And in the following day the students met in a negotiation to prevent this from happening
again. So, they actually used three processes in resolving this dispute.Now, you can look at these
dispute resolution processes through a variety of lenses. And let's take a look at three of those
lenses. The first of which is called alternative dispute resolution, or shorthand is ADR.Several years
ago, people in business began to become concerned about the high cost of litigation. And they
started to ask this question. Why is it that when we are involved in a business dispute, we outsource
the dispute to lawyers and to the legal system? We have the business skills to resolve disputes. Why
aren't we using those skills? And so they started to develop alternatives to litigation. I remember
when this happened in the mid 80s, because the CEO of a large corporation called Citicorp called in
a group of us from 10 leading business schools for lunch. We had a long lunch and a long meeting. 
And at the meeting, his name was Walter Riston. At the meeting Mr. Riston basically challenged us. 
He said why aren't you teaching ADR in business schools? Litigation is costly. In terms of time and
money to businesses, you should be teaching future business leaders how to use ADR. And the ten
of us went back to our campuses and we began developing courses on negotiating and dispute
resolution. So my question for you is, look at this spectrum. Which of these processes would you call
alternatives to litigation? Litigation is the enemy. Which are alternatives?Write down you answer. 
And the alternatives you should have written down are arbitration, mediation and negotiation. And
we're going to explore these later in the course. And I'm going to give you some tools that you can
use for avoiding litigation later on.A second lens that you can use in looking at the spectrum of
processes is the so called third party lens. When you read the newspaper, often you'll read that a
business was involved in a dispute, or in litigation, and they used a third party process to resolve the
dispute. Which of these processes would you call third party processes?Please write down your
answer.And you should have written down based on our earlier discussion litigation. The third party
is a judge, arbitration, which involves bringing in an arbitrator. And mediation, which is assisted
negotiation where a mediator helps the parties resolve the dispute.Now, in thinking about these third
party processes, you can think about your external disputes. Your disputes with other parties where
you bring in the third parties. But, there are also internal third party processes where you as a
manager or as a leader in a company will play the role of an arbitrator or a mediator in resolving a
dispute. And so later when we look at a film clip of the mediation you will see some techniques and
tools that you can use as a business leader for resolving disputes within your company.The third
lens I'd like to look at is an academic lens called power, rights, and interests. Academics love this
framework. Of course, power is obvious, but which of these processes relate to rights?  That is to
determine who's right and wrong. And which of these processes relate to finding the underlying
interests of the parties and trying to build something that benefits both sides? Think about that for a
second, write down your answer. Which of these processes are rights oriented, and which of these
processes are interests oriented?And what you should have written down is that the rights
processes are litigation P‫ مرافعه‬and arbitration. Where the judge or arbitrator decides who's right
or wrong usually based on a legal rule.The interest option, are mediation and negotiation. Again,
mediation is simply a form of negotiation assisted by a third party. Now, even though this is an
academic construct, power, rights of interest, I personally think it's a very practical tool for giving you
options when you are faced with a dispute. And in fact, some companies use this as a tool. 
Here's an example, I won't identify the company but its from an internal company document and I
paraphrase, but what they say in the document, if you were involved in a dispute involving our
company, here are your choices. First of all you can use a power option. You can force the other
side to do what we want. Let's say we're in an argument with a supplier. We're powerful and
regardless of whether we're right or wrong we can force them to do what we want.Second, we can
try a rights option. We can go to a judge or an arbitrator who will decide who is right or wrong.Third,
we can use avoidance. We can withdraw from the dispute. Let them have what they want. Let's say
we're in a dispute with a key customer and we don't want to lose the customer. Even though we're
sure we're right, we'll let them have what they want. And then finally there's the interest option, try to
negotiate an agreement based on our needs.So, those are the three lenses. Now, there's a
additional final perspective for looking at this spectrum and that is, can these processes be used for 
deal making Instead of dispute resolution.All of these processes can be used for resolving disputes. 
But what if you're doing a deal? Traditionally with deal making the focus is on negotiation.Whereas
the other processes relate to dispute resolution. However, there has been a major change over the
last decade, where some of these processes such as arbitration and mediation are used for deal
making as well as for dispute resolution. And I'll give you some detail examples later in the
course. But for the time being, here's a quick example.A few years ago, I was teaching a negotiation
course in Hong Kong and one of the participants came up to me during a coffee break. And he said,
that he was a negotiation consultant. He was working with a large power company in Hong Kong,
and that he was negotiating, and let me get the exact number here. He was trying to negotiate a
contract that was worth $10 billion that would run over 25 years. The power company wanted to
purchase gas, basically. And they have been negotiating for months and they were stalled ‫ وقت کوشی‬, 
they were not making any progress. And so he wanted my advice on how to move things forward. 
Now i'm thinking to myself, now let me get this straight, you're a negotiation  consultant, you're a
professional consultant, you've been working on this for months, and you want me to solve this
problem during a 15 minute coffee break. That was my first thought, which I didn't say to the other
person. But then I started to ask this person a couple of questions. That I'm sure you would ask,
especially after you finish this course. Number one, have you completed all of your fact finding, have
you presented all possible facts to the other side that might change their perspective. They said yes,
we have completely explored facts. Second, have you explored all of your BATNA options. 
Now that's not gonna mean anything to you right now, but it will shortly. BATNA is a critical concept. 
And his basic answer was yes, we've thoroughly looked at all BATNA possibilities. So I was running
out of questions, but then I asked a final question, have you thought about bringing in a third party,
an arbitrator or a mediator to help you with the more difficult aspects of this negotiation? 
And at that point, the light went on. He had not thought about using arbitration or mediation for deal
making, as opposed to dispute resolution. And he left with that takeaway idea. So we're gonna get
into this in more detail later, but think of these two processes, arbitration and mediation, as useful
not only for deal making, but also for dispute resolution. So, in conclusion,we think about the
distinctions between dispute resolution and deal making. I encourage you to search for interests,
even when you're in a dispute resolution negotiation. It's important to understand the six types of
dispute resolution. And the three lenses that you can use for looking at these types. The ADR lens,
the third party processes lens and the power/rights/interests lens. And finally, consider using dispute
resolution processes for deal making, such as mediation and arbitration.

Key Ideas:

 A while ago, there was an article published by Frank Sander and Jeff Rubin
called, The Janus Quality of Negotiations, which gave a very clear perspective on
the difference between dispute resolution negotiation and deal making
negotiation.
 Frank Sander by the way, is one of the fathers of alternative dispute resolution,
ADR which we're gonna be talking about in a few minutes.
  And Frank and Jeff in their article, clearly noted that when you're making a deal,
you tend to be forward looking.
 There are a number of processes that you can use in addition to negotiation for
resolving the dispute and let's take a look at some of these processes. You can
start on the right hand side, Avoidance. The second of course, is Negotiation.
Which is used for both deal making and dispute resolution. A third process is
Mediation, which involves bringing in a third party to mediate the dispute. A
mediation is a negotiation, but it is a negotiation assisted by a third party. A fourth
possibility is Arbitration. Bringing in a third party, but in this case the third party
has the right to decide the dispute. Which is also true of Litigation.
 Litigation is costly. In terms of time and money to businesses, you should be
teaching future business leaders how to use ADR.
 Which of these processes are rights oriented, and which of these processes are
interests oriented? And what you should have written down is that the rights
processes are litigation and arbitration. Where the judge or arbitrator decides
who's right or wrong usually based on a legal rule. The interest option, are
mediation and negotiation.
 And the three lenses that you can use for looking at these types. The ADR lens,
the third party processes lens and the power/rights/interests lens. And finally,
consider using dispute resolution processes for deal making, such as mediation
and arbitration.   

Analyzing the Negotiation

0:09
We now continue our look at preparing for negotiation and planning your negotiation 
strategy by looking at an especially important question that will apply to. 
Virtually every negotiation. 
And that is how can I conduct a negotiation analysis? 
How should I analyze a negotiation?
Play video starting at ::29 and follow transcript0:29
This question is so 
important that I'm breaking the discussion into three segments. 
First of all, what questions should I ask to complete an analysis? 
Second, what is my BATNA in a dispute resolution negotiation? 
And finally, how can I use an especially valuable tool called a decision tree 
to complete a BATNA analysis, regardless of whether it's a dispute 
resolution negotiation or a deal-making negotiation. 
So let's start with this first question. 
What questions should I ask to complete a negotiation analysis? 
In order to give a framework for 
our discussion, let's take this simple negotiation. 
Let's assume that you're preparing to negotiate the sale of your car 
to a possible buyer, Pooja. 
Pooja is the only person who responded to an ad that you posted a week ago.
Play video starting at :1:27 and follow transcript1:27
You need at least 4,000 from the sale 
to finance the purchase of a truck that you have ordered.
Play video starting at :1:34 and follow transcript1:34
You want to keep your car for three more weeks, 
which is when the truck will arrive.
Play video starting at :1:38 and follow transcript1:38
The reasonable value of the car is $5,000. 
You've done a lot of research on this. 
You've looked at a lot of online calculators in coming up with this value. 
If you can't find a buyer willing to pay at least 4,500, 
you'll sell the car to a friend, Tommaso for 4,000. 
You know that Tommaso will let you keep your car for 
the next three weeks, so Those are the facts. 
Now, what I'd like you to do is to hit pause, and think about this situation. 
If this was you, 
what would be your strategy going into this negotiation with Pooja? 
Just jot down a few points that you would use as your negotiation strategy.
Play video starting at :2:27 and follow transcript2:27
When I ask my students this question, when I give them a negotiation similar 
to this and ask what is your strategy going into the negotiation? 
Often, a response I get is something like this, well, my basic strategy 
going into the negotiation is to try to ask Pooja a lot of questions, 
try to find out what her position is, try to find out what she's willing to pay, 
find out about her interests, and then proceed. 
Now there's nothing wrong with that. 
In fact asking questions is very positive.
Play video starting at :3:3 and follow transcript3:03
The problem is that, if that's your strategy, 
you have no way to measure the information that you are getting from Puja. 
You need some kind of a framework for 
considering the answers that she gives you. 
To quote a famous philosopher, 
is actually a baseball player, by, the name of Yogi Berra. 
If you don't know where you're going, you might end up somewhere else.
Play video starting at :3:34 and follow transcript3:34
He comes up with these adages that cause people to scratch their heads, but 
there's also a lot of wisdom in In these If you don't know where you're going, 
if you don't have a framework for 
thinking about the negotiation, you might not end up where you want. 
A few years ago, I looked at the richest people in the world and 
tried to find out what their negotiation strategies are. 
And what I discovered, a common theme among these rich people, 
Is they entered every negotiation knowing exactly where they wanted to be. 
And if they didn't get it, they walked away. 
So very important to have a framework for 
considering the information that you uncovered during a negotiation. 
And what I would suggest is to focus on these key questions.
Play video starting at :4:27 and follow transcript4:27
First of all, 
what's your overall goal in reaching the negotiated agreement with Pooja?
Play video starting at :4:33 and follow transcript4:33
Second, what issues are most important to you in reaching that goal?
Play video starting at :4:38 and follow transcript4:38
And then the why question. 
Try to get to the interest behind your position. 
Why are these interests important? 
Third, and this one is especially important. 
What is your best alternative to a negotiated agreement? 
The acronym is BATNA. 
This is what gives you leverage. 
This is how you can measure the agreement that you're developing with Pooja. 
If that agreement the Pooja is willing to enter into with you 
is not as good as your best alternative, then walk away.
Play video starting at :5:14 and follow transcript5:14
Next, what is your reservation price? 
This is negotiation language for saying in this negotiation what's the lowest price? 
That you will accept. 
What is your most likely price? 
What's a reasonable price that you would be happy with? 
And then finally what is your stretch goal? 
Now this last question is especially important because the negotiation 
research shows that the people who select the largest stretch goal.
Play video starting at :5:46 and follow transcript5:46
Are the most successful in negotiations overall. 
Now because of a large stretch goal, they might lose out in individual negotiations 
but when you look at their overall results, they are most successful.
Play video starting at :6:1 and follow transcript6:01
If that's true, then in this particular negotiation with Pooja. 
Why not start your negotiation with a very large stretch goal? 
You think that you might end up with $5,000 for the car. 
Why not ask Pooja for $25,000? 
Think about that for a second. 
What answer would you come up with to that question? 
If stretch goals are so important, 
why not use a very large stretch goal such as 25,000. 
And I think you'll immediately respond, 
well, if I do that, I don't have any factual basis for 
25,000 and I'm going to lose credibility, Pooja is simply going to walk away. 
And I think that's the risk. 
You want to pick a large stretch goal. 
But not so large that you lose credibility.
Play video starting at :6:57 and follow transcript6:57
I don't know if you've ever heard of an American athlete 
by the name of Michael Tyson.
Play video starting at :7:5 and follow transcript7:05
But Michael is a boxer, he's known especially for 
one fight where he chewed on the ear of another boxer named Evander Holyfield.
Play video starting at :7:19 and follow transcript7:19
I happened to be in Rome a few years ago, with my son and 
we walked by Evander and he's a very, very nice person. 
And I asked if I could take a picture with my son and he graciously said yes. 
I was tempted to say, Evander Holyfield can you turn your head a little bit so 
we can see the ear., but I didn't. 
In any event Mike Tyson is known for that fight and 
Mike awhile ago bought a little place in Farmington Connecticut. 
56,000 square feet, 18 bedrooms, 28 bathrooms. 
Wasn't large enough so he added a 3,000 square foot night club 
with a two-tier dance floor, and 200 TV screens, etc. 
He bought the house in 1997 for 2.7 million. 
And the very next year, he put it on the market for 22 million. 
Not surprisingly, there were no takers on the house. 
And so, he tried to back track a little bit the following year. 
1999 lowered the price to $12.9 million, still no takers. 
Obviously, he had lost credibility with that huge stretch goal. 
Next year he lowered the price again to $5 million, still no takers, and 
finally he decided to take the house off the market. 
This is from an article in The Wall Street Journal Entitled no Bites on Tyson House. 
Here's another example, a very sad story that was written up in a book called 
A Civil Action, which was later turned into a movie starring John Travolta.
Play video starting at :8:54 and follow transcript8:54
The basic facts were that in the town of Woburn, Massachusetts 
there was water contamination that led to a high number of leukemia cases, and 
parents in the town hired and attorney, played by Travolta in the movie version. 
And he sued two large companies. 
At one point in the film, and in real life, 
they held a settlement meeting to try to negotiate a settlement to the lawsuits.
Play video starting at :9:25 and follow transcript9:25
And at this meeting it was clear, as depicted in the movie, 
it was clear that the companies we'd probably settle the case for 25 million, 
however the attorney ratcheted up the demand to 320 million, huge stretch goal.
Play video starting at :9:42 and follow transcript9:42
So basically the other attorneys ended up walking out of the settlement conference, 
they thought that was a ridiculous stretch goal. 
And the end result was the case against one of the companies was dismissed. 
The other company settled for $8 million, far less than probably what they would've 
paid initially and the attorney ended up filing for bankruptcy. 
And of course, the parents were deprived of a larger settlement for their loss. 
So those are examples of
Play video starting at :10:14 and follow transcript10:14
the impact of becoming too greedy with a large stretch goal.
Play video starting at :10:20 and follow transcript10:20
So let's go back to the case involved Pooja and
Play video starting at :10:26 and follow transcript10:26
what I'd like you to do is to look at the facts in this case and 
try to answer the key questions that I posed earlier. 
So please take a pencil and paper and let's go down the list of questions. 
And the first one is what is your overall goal in the negotiation. 
Please write that down.
Play video starting at :10:50 and follow transcript10:50
Second, what issues are most important to you?
Play video starting at :10:55 and follow transcript10:55
And why are these issues important? 
Write down your answers.
Play video starting at :10:59 and follow transcript10:59
Third, what's your BATNA?
Play video starting at :11:2 and follow transcript11:02
Very important question, often probably the very 
first question you always wanna ask in preparing for any negotiation. 
What's your BATNA?
Play video starting at :11:13 and follow transcript11:13
What's your reservation price?
Play video starting at :11:16 and follow transcript11:16
What is your most likely price?
Play video starting at :11:20 and follow transcript11:20
And finally what is your stretch goal?
Play video starting at :11:24 and follow transcript11:24
Now you have data for all questions except for the last one, stretch goal and 
you're gonna have to be creative in coming up with the answer to that question.
Play video starting at :11:35 and follow transcript11:35
So, again, these are the questions, and 
let's look at the answers to those questions, what's your overall goal? 
Well, you wanna sell the car.
Play video starting at :11:46 and follow transcript11:46
What issues are important to you? 
Why are they important? 
Price is an important issue and the reason is that you need the money to buy a truck. 
The transfer date is important, because you need the car in the next 3 weeks. 
What's your best alternative, what's your BATNA?
Play video starting at :12:3 and follow transcript12:03
Selling the car to your friend, Tommaso. 
What's your reservation price? 
The lowest price you'll accept from Pooja, 4500. 
Your most likely price is 5,000. 
And stretch goal, probably a lot of variation here, but 
let's assume that the stretch goal is 6,000. 
Now in answering those questions, 
it's often useful to try to diagram your answers. 
So this is what your analysis might look like. 
You have your BATNA on the left side, your reservation price of 4500, 
your most likely and your stretch goal.
Play video starting at :12:40 and follow transcript12:40
Now this is a critical part of the analysis, and 
you can complete this part fairly easily. 
What becomes more difficult is trying to look at how 
this negotiation looks from the perspective of the other side. 
This is the way a very famous negotiator put it.
Play video starting at :13: and follow transcript13:00
I find it helpful to try to figure out in advance where the other person would 
like to end up. 
At what point he will do the deal and 
still feel like he's coming away with something. 
As we'll talk about later when we get to the psychology of negotiation, 
this is one of the landmarks of successful negotiators. 
They always look at the deal from the perspective of the other side. 
Now, of course, it's often difficult to obtain details 
of what the deal looks like from the other side. 
You might have to guess before you go into the room and then. 
Once you go into the negotiating room and 
start negotiating, you probably will want to revise your figures. 
But let's say that the other side's figures look something like this. 
Let's say that Pooja's reservation price is 5,500. 
Puja is willing to pay that much for the car. 
Pooja thinks it probably should be able to get the car for 4500 and 
let's say her stretch goal is 3500. 
She would like to get you to agree to a low price of 3500. 
So, we have the analysis from your side, 
we've got the analysis from Pooja's side, and then there's one last key 
missing piece which is called the zone of potential agreement. 
Z-O-P-A. 
And that is when you look at these numbers, try to determine 
where the deal can take place between what number and what number. 
Think about that for a second and write down the zone of potential agreement.
Play video starting at :14:43 and follow transcript14:43
The deal can take place between what number and what number.
Play video starting at :14:48 and follow transcript14:48
And the answer that you should've come up with is that 
the deal can take place between the two reservation prices. 
In other words the price might be as low as $4500, 
which is the lowest price that you're willing to take as the seller, or 
it might be as high as $5500 which 
is the most that Pooja is willing to pay as the buyer. 
This is Zone of Potential Agreement, the ZOPA.
Play video starting at :15:19 and follow transcript15:19
Now a couple of years ago, I was teaching 
in Bulgaria to a group of students from pretty much around the world.
Play video starting at :15:30 and follow transcript15:30
And there were three Russian students in the front row. 
And we were talking about this concept of ZOPA and 
I explained to the class that it's really great if you can go into a negotiation 
where there is a very large zone of potential agreement. 
Very large ZOPA.
Play video starting at :15:49 and follow transcript15:49
And whenever I said this, the rest of the students began to laugh, so 
finally I had to stop and say, what's so funny about ZOPA?
Play video starting at :15:56 and follow transcript15:56
Well apparently in Russian, your ZOPA is your bottom. 
And so to them I was saying it's great to 
go into a negotiation with a very large bottom.
Play video starting at :16:8 and follow transcript16:08
That's one of the challenges in cross cultural teaching.
Play video starting at :16:13 and follow transcript16:13
Okay, so that's the analysis conclusions basically, 
focus on these key questions in a negotiation. 
We've covered these in great detail. 
These questions of course focus on the numbers. 
And there are other issues that are likely to arise, and 
let's just conclude by a question about one of these other issues.
Play video starting at :16:37 and follow transcript16:37
We determined earlier that an issue that was very important to you 
was the date of transfer. 
You wanted to keep the car for three weeks. 
So let's say you're negotiating with Pooja and you tell Pooja 
that this is one of your demands, no transfer until three weeks. 
Now, think of how Pooja can respond to that demand.
Play video starting at :17:2 and follow transcript17:02
Two basic responses. 
First of all, maybe that delivery date is not important to Pooja at all. 
So what is Pooja gonna do? 
She's going to use that as a bargaining chip. 
She's gonna try to get a lower price from you. 
In exchange for delaying the delivery. 
She might pretend as though the issue is important, but 
it's just a bargaining tactic.
Play video starting at :17:26 and follow transcript17:26
The other issue is, the other response from Pooja 
is that maybe this issue is very important to Pooja. 
Maybe she needs the car immediately.
Play video starting at :17:36 and follow transcript17:36
And so you are at a standstill. 
She demands the car immediately. 
You demand delaying transfer until three weeks. 
How can you respond? 
How can you resolve that standoff? 
Think about that for a second?
Play video starting at :17:57 and follow transcript17:57
The way to analyze the standoff is you each have a position. 
Your position is three weeks from now. 
Her position is immediately. 
Remember what to do when you're faced with positional bargaining. 
Ask why? 
Pooja, why do you need the car Immediately?
Play video starting at :18:17 and follow transcript18:17
Her answer might be for example, well, 
I just started a new job and I need the car to get to work. 
Well, once you focus on her interests, 
maybe you can think of ways to meet those interests. 
Maybe you could even give her a ride to work. 
Where does she work? 
Is it close to where you work? 
Where does she live? 
Is it close to where you live. 
You might be able to meet her interests in a way that also match your interests.
Play video starting at :18:47 and follow transcript18:47
So that concludes our look at this first phase of a negotiation analysis and 
we're now going to look at two other aspects of negotiation analysis.