Issues vs. Positions

A corporate executive goes to a car dealer and tells the salesman she needs a new car to use for business purposes. First the salesman brings out a beautiful car that is an unbelievably bright color of red. The executive says she hates the color red. Then the salesman brings out the fastest sports car on the lot, blue this time, not red. The executive says she hates to drive fast. Finally, believing he has made the sale, the salesman brings out a beige minivan. The executive, now completely frustrated, says she cannot stand the seats, and she leaves without buying a car. “What is the problem?” the salesman thinks, “I brought out the entire range of cars for her to test—it seems like nothing will suit her.”

A fundamental principle for effective negotiations or resolving disputes is to first understand the other party’s interests rather than focusing on their positions. As it so happens, the executive has an interest in projecting the right image to her company’s board of directors. She does not want to be ostentatious (no bright red cars). She wants to be perceived as prudent and responsible (no fast sports cars). She has a bad back and wants a good seat (no crappy minivan seats). The salesman, seeing an executive who could probably afford any car she wanted, never thought to ask about the interests that needed to be addressed in selecting her car, simply trotted out all the cars he had for sale, and was met with rejection with each one.

Here is a better plan, which actually represents a fundamental problem-solving technique:

• Spend time with the other party and try to understand their issues.
• Listen to their positions, or their arguments, and be sympathetic but do not get too invested in them.
• Avoid trying to convince the other party they are wrong.
• When the real negotiations begin, focus more on resolving the issues, and less on responding to the positions. (A brilliant argument to win the position point is unlikely to lead to an agreed solution!)

Our years of experience negotiating transactions and assisting clients in resolving disputes have taught us that it is primarily the issue that must be resolved, and not the position. It just so happens that the issue is likely to facilitate a much wider range of solutions than the position does. That means the issue can become the platform for a solution that our side really wants.

In short, our side gets what they want by helping to solve the other party’s issues. Everyone wins. It’s a good deal.

That’s how good deals are closed. After all, a bad deal for either party is a bad deal for all parties because it will never work in the long term. In reality, each party has a stake in finding a good deal for the other party.