Read the article below and evaluate the principled negotiation process. Explain one aspect of the process that you think is essential and one aspect of the process that you think may not work well (you can talk about portions of some of the 4 steps; you dont have to review a step (of the 4) in whole.

A principled negotiation seeks to divide the emotions of participants from the process of the negotiation. It frames negotiations as problems to be solved, rather than battles to be won.

Principled negotiation follows four guidelines:

Step 1: Separate people from the problem

Step 2: Focus on interests instead of positions

Step 3: Invent options for mutual gain

Step 4: Insist on objective criteria

Unfortunately, not everyone will approach a negotiation in a principled manner. One participant may still come to the table with a hard approach, intending to win no matter what. In those situations, Fischer and Ury suggest using a mediator and being prepared with an alternative course of action, a BATNA, in case it is necessary to walk away from the negotiation. This concept of the BATNA is sometimes considered to be the fifth foundation principle of principled negotiations.

When thinking about negotiating, most people picture the hard approach, viewing negotiation as a battle of wills. Hard bargaining emphasizes results. Haggling in a market is the stereotypical image of hard bargaining.

In contrast, the soft approach focuses on preserving the relationship ahead of results. While both hard and soft negotiation styles focus on positions, the soft approach is the opposite of the hard approach in many regards. The couple in O. Henrys "Gift of the Magi" are quintessential softies, sacrificing to accommodate each other.

Hard Approach to Negotiation	Soft Approach to Negotiation
Treat participants as adversaries Suspicious of other negotiators Use of threats Confrontational Focus on positions Unwilling to concede	Treat participants as friends Trusting of other participants Extend offers Non-confrontational Focus on positions Willing to concede

Pairing Negotiation Styles

The outcome of a negotiation is determined as much by the negotiators' tactics as by the results they hope to achieve. Different combinations of hard and soft approaches will yield different results, but in most cases will result in a scenario where at least one party loses out.

When hard negotiators butt heads, they try to drive the other to a bottom line. Typified by dickering over price, this will result in a win for both parties only if there is a common price that both are satisfied with. For this reason, many hard negotiations end with both parties walking away.

Soft negotiators are usually steamrollered by hard negotiators. They are quickly pushed to the hard negotiator's goal as they give ground in an effort to preserve good will. These negotiations almost always end in a win for the hard negotiator and a loss for the soft negotiator.

When two soft negotiators bargain, they can both win if they can cooperate effectively. However, their efforts to appease the other side may result in both negotiators agreeing to an outcome neither side really likes. In summary:

• Hard vs. Hard: No guaranteed winner, often a lose-lose outcome.
• Hard vs. Soft: Usually a win-lose outcome in favor of the hard negotiator.
• Soft vs. Soft: No guaranteed winners, sometimes a lose-lose outcome.