3

3D Negotiation

An approach created by James Sebenius and David Lax to describe a model that focuses on three aspects of negotiation: tactics, deal design, and setup. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 2)

A

Accommodating

An approach to negotiation that emphasizes empathy over assertiveness. Accommodating negotiators prize good relationships, and display concern, compassion, and understanding in a negotiation. They may negotiate in order to resolve differences quickly, and typically listen well but may be too quick to give up on their own interests when they sense that relationship is threatened. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 52)

Active Listening

A set of skills and an attitude. By asking open-ended questions, seeking clarification, driving for specificity, and then demonstrating a grasp of what the other party has said, you both learn and project empathy with your counterparts' point of view. Typical active-listening questions include, "If I understand you correctly, you need... Why is that important to you?" and "What specific concerns do you have about our proposal?" (Roger Fisher and William Ury, Getting to Yes [Penguin Books, 1991], 34)

Adjudicative Proceeding

A method of dispute resolution that decides the legal rights of specific persons in order to settle or determine a dispute. Unlike mediation, adjudicative proceedings (i.e., litigation, arbitration, or mediation-arbitration) relinquish control of the legal process to a third party neutral who then determines the rights and obligations of the parties involved.

Adversarial Approach

An approach to conflict that sees negotiation as combat; the tougher and more aggressive negotiator wins, and the more conciliatory one loses. The adversarial approach lends itself to competition between negotiators. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 169)

Advocacy

The process of taking and working for a particular side's interests in a conflict. Lawyers engage in advocacy when they represent a client in a legal proceeding. Disputants can also engage in advocacy themselves--arguing for their own position in negotiation, mediation, or a political debate. Any attempt to persuade another side to agree to your demands is advocacy. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

Agent

A person who acts on a principal's behalf in a negotiation. Agents - such as lawyers, sports agents, or diplomats - may have special training or be able to assert the principal's interests more effectively than the principal. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 189). Also see "principal-agent theory."

Alternatives

The range of possible things you can do away from the table without the other negotiator's agreement. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 19)

Anchoring

An attempt to establish an initial position around which negotiators will make adjustments. (Richard Luecke, Harvard Business Essentials: Negotiation [Harvard Business Press, 2003], 49)

Arbitration

An adjudicative process by which a private third-party neutral renders a binding determination of an issue in dispute. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 318-19)

Arbitrator

An impartial third party with the coercive power to impose terms on the disputants. An arbitrator is not biased in favor of either party and subordinates personal preferences to some set of rules or values. Nor does a pure arbitrator have a sufficient stake in the outcome to bargain with the disputants. (Michael Watkins and Susan Rosegrant, Breakthrough International Negotiations [Jossey-Bass, 2001], 94)

Aspiration Value

Outcome to which you aspire that would serve your interests much better than your best alternative. Your aspiration value should aim high (much research has shown that negotiators with high aspirations on average do better), but also be supportable by arguments about why this value is reasonable. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 34)

Assertiveness

Advocacy of one's own needs, interests, and perspective. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004])

Averaging

An inter-personal bargaining tendency for resolving a group-action problem in distributive negotiation whereby the final agreement is roughly the average amount of the initial offer and any subsequent counteroffers. (Howard Raiffa, The Art and Science of Negotiation [Harvard University Press, 1982], 300-01)

Avoiding

An approach to negotiation that emphasizes neither assertiveness nor empathy. Avoiders shy away from conflict, and disengage in the face of explicit disagreement. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 52-53)

B

BATNA

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. The true measure by which you should judge any proposed agreement. It is the only standard which can protect you both from accepting terms that are too unfavorable and from rejecting terms it would be in your interest to accept. (Roger Fisher and William Ury, Getting to Yes [Penguin Books, 1991], 100-01)

Brainstorming

A free-flowing session in which ideas for solutions are generated by both parties. Ideas should not be evaluated during the brainstorming session, and parties should not take ownership of ideas. The goal of a brainstorming session is to liberate those at the table to suggest ideas. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 37-38)

C

Circle Of Value

An approach used to find creative ways to satisfy as many shared and differing interests as possible. The approach is characterized by exploring options without commitments (or threats), using interests and standards of legitimacy to explore ways to create and distribute value, and the parties' avoiding becoming a voice of authority. Also see "Problem-solving approach." (Bruce Patton, Building Relationships and the Bottom Line: The Circle of Value Approach to Negotiation [Harvard University Press, 2004], 4-5)

Coalition

Structures that become possible when three or more parties negotiate, and parties ally together to exploit or buy off each other. Coalition dynamics can arise across the table (between parties in a dispute) or behind the table (among individuals on one side or the other). (David A. Lax, James K. Sebenius)

Commitment

An agreement, demand, offer, or promise by one or more parties, and any formalization of that agreement. Commitment is commonly signaled by words such as, ÒI will offer,Ó I demand,Ó ÒWe agree,Ó or ÒI promise not toÉÓ Commitments can occur at any point in a negotiation and encompass anything from a minor procedural point (for example, a shared understanding of an agenda) to final and complete agreement, and anything in between (agreement to meet again; agreement on some terms, but not all). (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 284)

Communication

The process by which parties discuss and deal with the elements of a negotiation. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 284)

Competition

An approach to negotiation that emphasizes assertiveness over empathy. Competitive negotiators have winning as a goal, and enjoy feeling purposeful and in control. They also may seek to control the agenda and frame the issues in a negotiation, perhaps resorting to intimidation or bullying to get the biggest slice of the pie. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 51)

Concessions

The things one side gives up in order to deescalate or resolve a conflict. They may simply be points in an argument, a reduction in demands, or a softening of one side's position. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm

Conciliation

Efforts by a third party to improve the relationship between two or more disputants. It may be done as a part of mediation, or independently. Generally, the third party will work with the disputants to correct misunderstandings, reduce fear and distrust, and generally improve communication between the parties in conflict. Sometimes this alone will result in dispute settlement; at other times, it paves the way for a later mediation process. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

Conflict Management

The long-term management of intractable conflicts and the people involved in them so that they do not escalate out of control and become violent. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

Conflict Resolution

The process of resolving a dispute or a conflict permanently, by providing each sides' needs, and adequately addressing their interests so that they are satisfied with the outcome. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm

Conflict Transformation

A change (usually an improvement) in the nature of a conflict, a de-escalation or a reconciliation between people or groups. The concept of conflict transformation reflects the notion that conflicts go on for long periods of time, changing the nature of the relationships between the people involved, and themselves changing as people's response to the situation develops over time. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

Consensus

An agreement among all participating stakeholders. (Lawrence E. Susskind, Sarah McKearnan and Jennifer Thomas-Larmer, The Consensus Building Handbook [Sage Publications, 1999], 327)

Consensus Building

A process involving a good-faith effort to meet the interests of all stakeholders seeking unanimous agreement. (Lawrence E. Susskind, Sarah McKearnan and Jennifer Thomas-Larmer, The Consensus Building Handbook, [Sage Publications, 1999], 6)

Contingency Contract

A provision in an agreement that leaves specific elements of the deal unresolved until a particular source of uncertainty is resolved in the future. Such provisions allow both sides in the negotiation to ÒbetÓ on their differing beliefs regarding the probability of a future event. (Deepak Malhotra and Max Bazerman, Negotiation Genius [Bantam, 2007], 305)

D

Dance Of Concessions

See Òpositional-bargaining approachÓ.

Deal Design

An approach to negotiation that goes beyond tactics and takes into account sources of economic and noneconomic value. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 2)

Difficult Conversation

A framework for describing how to apply interest-based negotiation techniques to conversations and dilemmas in daily life. According to this framework, underlying every difficult conversation are actually three deeper conversations. (Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton and Sheila Heen, Difficult Conversations [Viking/Penguin, 1999], 7). Also see Òthree conversationsÓ.

Distributive Negotiation

A type of negotiation in which the parties compete over the distribution of a fixed pool of value. Here, any gain by one party represents a loss to the other. Also known as a zero-sum negotiation or win-lose negotiation. (Richard Luecke, Harvard Business Essentials: Negotiation [Harvard Business Press, 2003], 2-3)

Dovetailing Differences

A term that refers to identifying differences in interests or priorities among the parties in a negotiation, and making strategic decisions based on these differences in order to create value. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 125)

E

Empathy

Demonstrating an understanding of the other sideÕs needs, interests, and perspective, without necessarily agreeing.

Empathy Loop

A technique to demonstrate understanding and empathy with another party. The empathy loop has three steps: (1) Inquire about a subject or issue, (2) the other side responds, and (3) you demonstrate your understanding of the response and test or check that understanding with the other person. In other words, you loop your understanding of the other sideÕs perspective back to them. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 63)

F

Facilitator

A professional trained to help parties negotiate productively. The role of a facilitator may vary, but in most cases they are responsible for keeping the conversation on track and communication open. (Lawrence E. Susskind and Jeffrey L. Cruikshank, Breaking RobertÕs Rules [Oxford University Press, USA, 2006], 27)

Feelings Conversation

The part of a Òdifficult conversationÓ that asks and answers questions regarding feelings and emotions. (Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen, Difficult Conversations [Viking/Penguin, 1999 ], 7)

Frame

The story or narrative each bargainer tells herself about the negotiation. Your frame in a negotiation reveals how you understand what you and the other bargainer are negotiating and what you think the task ahead is. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 207)

I

Identity

The way people see themselves Ð the groups they feel a part of, the significant aspects of themselves that they use to describe themselves to others. Some theorists distinguish between collective identity, social identity, and personal identity. However, all related in one way or another to a description of who one is, and how one fits into his social groups and society overall. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

Identity Conversation

The part of a Òdifficult conversationÓ that we have with ourselves about what a problematic situation means to us. This conversation is an internal debate about who we are and how we see ourselves. (Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton and Sheila Heen, Difficult Conversations [Viking/Penguin, 1999], 8,14)

Information Asymmetry

A situation in which one party has more information than the other. (Richard Luecke, Harvard Business Essentials: Negotiation [Harvard Business Press, 2003], 128)

Integrative Negotiation

Negotiations in which there is a potential for the partiesÕ interests to be integrated in ways that create joint value or enlarge the pie. Integrative negotiation is possible when the parties have some shared interests or opportunities to realize mutual gains through trades across multiple issues. (Michael Watkins and Susan Rosegrant, Breakthrough International Negotiations [Jossey-Bass, 2001], 31)

Interest-based Negotiation

See Òproblem-solving approachÓ.

Interests

A partyÕs basic needs, wants, and motivations that are potentially at stake in a negotiation. The measure of success in a negotiation is how well your interests are met. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 69)

L

Ladder Of Inference

A model that describes how individuals reach conclusions and make decisions based on facts. The model states that individuals move from observable data and experiences to selected Òdata,Ó added meanings, assumptions from those selected data and meanings, conclusions that are drawn, beliefs from those conclusions, and actions based on those beliefs. (Peter M. Senge, Art Kleiner, Charlotte Roberts and Bryan J. Smith, The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook [Currency, Doubleday, 1994])

Legitimacy

A feeling of being treated fairly in a negotiation. Often an interest in legitimacy and feeling fairly treated is the main driver in a dispute. However, parties with differing views on what is fair may fail to realize that beneath their conflicting positions is the same underlying interest. For example, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the perceived legitimacy of where the border is drawn between Israel and a Palestinian state is at least as important as how many acres are on each side. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 281-282)

Litigation

A formalized legal process to resolve a dispute through legal action in the form of a lawsuit. It often entails a contractual issue. It is the act of either bringing or challenging a lawsuit. (from www.negotiations.com/definition)

Logrolling

The act of trading across issues in a negotiation. Logrolling requires that a negotiator knows his or her own priorities, but also the priorities of the other side. If one side values something more than the other, they should be given it in exchange for reciprocity on issues that are a higher priority to their opponent. (Deepak Malhotra and Max Bazerman, Negotiation Genius [Bantam, 2007], 61)

M

Mediation

A negotiation between two or more parties facilitated by an agreed-upon third party. Skilled third-party mediators can lower the emotional temperature in a negotiation, foster more effective communication, help uncover less obvious interests, offer face-saving possibilities for movement, and suggest solutions that the parties might have overlooked. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 108-109)

Mediator

An impartial, mutually acceptable third party whose goal is to help conflicted parties resolve their dispute. Mediators lack the power to coerce or bargain, but they can use facilitative power to influence disputants. (Michael Watkins and Susan Rosegrant, Breakthrough International Negotiations [Jossey-Bass, 2001], 93)

Meeting Facilitation

The impartial management of meetings designed to enable participants to focus on substantive issues and goals. (Lawrence E. Susskind, Sarah McKearnan and Jennifer Thomas-Larmer, The Consensus Building Handbook [Sage Publications, 1999], 207)

Moral Hazard

A problem created when a contract shifts risk from one party to another party and information asymmetries permit the non-riskbearer to behave adversely under the contract without detection or consequence. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 26)

Multi-track Diplomacy

The idea that international exchanges can take many forms beyond official negotiations between diplomats. Examples of multi-track diplomacy include official and unofficial conflict resolution efforts, citizen and scientific exchanges, international business negotiations, international cultural and athletic activities and other international contacts and cooperative efforts. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

N

Negotiation Skills

Back-and-forth communication designed to reach an agreement between two or more parties with some interests that are shared and others that may conflict or simply be different. Negotiation is an intrinsic part of any kind of joint action, problem solving, and dispute resolution, and may be verbal, nonverbal, explicit, implicit, direct, or through intermediaries. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 279)

Neutral Evaluation / Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE)

A process in which a third party neutral examines the evidence in what is usually a lawsuit and listens to the disputants' positions, then gives the parties his or her evaluation on the strength of their cases and the likely outcome in court.

O

Options

A possible agreement or pieces of a potential agreement upon which negotiators might possibly agree. Options can include substantive terms and conditions, procedures, contingencies, even deliberate omissions or ambiguities Ð anything parties might agree on that might help to satisfy their respective interests. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 283)

P

Peacebuilding

The process of restoring normal relations between people. It requires the reconciliation of differences, apology and forgiveness of past harm, and the establishment of a cooperative relationship between groups, replacing the adversarial or competitive relationship that used to exist. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

Position

A proposed outcome that represents one way among many that issues might be resolved and interests met. Explicit demands made during a negotiation often represent a partyÕs position, although the underlying interest may be broader and quite different. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 280)

Positional Bargaining

An approach to negotiation that frames negotiation as an adversarial, zero-sum exercise focused on claiming Ð rather than creating Ð value. Typically, one party will stake out a high (or low) opening position (demand or offer) and the other a correspondingly low (or high) one. Then a series of (usually reciprocal) concessions are made until an agreement is reached somewhere in the middle of the opening positions, or no agreement is reached at all. (Bruce Patton, Building Relationships and the Bottom Line: The Circle of Value Approach to Negotiation [Harvard University Press, 2004], 288)

Principal-agent Theory

Three ways in which agents may differ from their principals. First, the agents may have different preferences from their principal, such as willingness to work. Second, agents may have different incentives from the principal. Agents may have a different stake in the outcome or may receive different rewards than the principal. Third, agents may have information that is unavailable to the principal, or vice versa. These types of divergences may give rise to problems relating to monitoring, incentives, coordination, and strategy. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 190)

Prisoner

A Òsocial dilemmaÓ or Òsocial trapÓ in game theory between two subjects that presents one subject with the choice to act nobly or selfishly whereby their choice to act one way or the other in conjunction with the level of nobility demonstrated by their counterpart leads to respective payoffs (gains or losses) for both sides. It is called the prisonerÕs dilemma because this asocial game was initially written as a role play between two prisoners. (Howard Raiffa, The Art and Science of Negotiation [Harvard University Press, 1982], 346-47)

Problem-solving Approach

An approach to negotiation first articulated in the book Getting to YES written by Roger Fisher and William Ury. The problem-solving approach argues that (1) negotiators should work together as colleagues to determine whether an agreement is possible that is better for both of them than no agreement, (2) in doing so they should postpone commitments while exploring how best to maximize and fairly distribute the value of any agreement, and (3) it makes sense for one party to take this approach even if the other does not. The problem-solving approach emphasizes partiesÕ underlying interests rather than their positions, and encourages parties to maintain and build their relationship even if they disagree rather than creating an adversarial process. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 292-93)

R

Relationship

As one of the Òseven elements,Ó relationship refers to the relationship a negotiator has or wants with other parties. This may include his or her relationship both with those across the table and with anyone else who might affect the negotiation or be affected by the negotiatorÕs reputation. The conduct and outcome of a negotiation have the potential to either damage or strengthen a relationship. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 282)

Reservation Value

Translation of BATNA into a value at the table Ð the amount at which you are indifferent between reaching a deal and walking away to your BATNA. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 19)

Ripeness

A conflict is said to be "ripe" for settlement or negotiation when it has reached a stalemate, or when all of the parties have determined that their alternatives to negotiation will not get them what they want or need. In this case, they are likely to be ready to negotiate a settlement that will attain at least part of their interests, more than they are getting otherwise or stand to get if they pursue their force-based options further. (from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/glossary.htm)

S

Setup

Actions away from the negotiating table that shape and reshape the situation to a negotiatorÕs advantage. Changes in setup may include approaching the right parties to participate in the negotiation, setting the right expectations, or dealing with the right issues that engage the right set of interests. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 2)

Seven Elements

A framework for understanding and analyzing negotiation. The seven elements include interests, legitimacy, relationships, alternatives, options, commitments, and communication. A seven-elements approach can be particularly helpful during pre-negotiation preparation. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 280)

Social Trap

A term used to describe the nature of the ÒprisonerÕs dilemmaÓ in game theory. It is used to highlight the competitive tension between the subjects involved. (Howard Raiffa, The Art and Science of Negotiation [Harvard University Press, 1982], 347)

Subjective Value

The social, perceptual, and emotional consequences of a negotiation. (Jared R. Curhan, Hillary A. Elfenbein and Heng Xu, What do people value when they negotiate? Mapping the domain of subjective value in negotiation [Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006], 4)

T

Tactics

The persuasive moves you make and the back-and-forth process you choose for dealing directly with the other side, at the table. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 2)

Three Conversations

The notion that all difficult conversations carry a common underlying structure that can be divided into three distinguishable categories or ÒconversationsÓ; 1) The ÒWhat Happened?Ó Conversation, 2) the Feelings Conversation, 3) and the Identity Conversation. (Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton and Sheila Heen, Difficult Conversations [Viking/Penguin, 1999], 4, 7)

Three Tensions

A model of negotiation that emphasizes that the essential challenges of negotiation are rooted in three tensions: between creating and distributing value, between empathy and assertiveness, and between the interests of principals and agents. (Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone, eds., Handbook of Dispute Resolution [Program on Negotiation/Jossey-Bass, 2005], 285)

V

Value

Economic or noneconomic aspects of the process or outcome of a negotiation about which one or more parties care strongly. Value could mean cash, property, relationships, reputation, fairness, or a partyÕs self-image. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 17)

Value Claiming

The result of competitive negotiations in which one partyÕs win is the other partyÕs loss, and one party seeks to claim a full share of the Òvalue pie.Ó Zero-sum negotiations are conducive to value claiming by the parties, although value claiming can occur even in win-win negotiations. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 17)

Value Creation

The result of cooperative problem-solving skills in a negotiation that uncover joint gains for both parties. Value creation is an aspect of Òwin-winÓ or Ònon-zero-sumÓ negotiation, in which both parties benefit from the agreement. (David A. Lax and James K. Sebenius, 3-D Negotiation [Harvard Business School Press, 2006], 17)

W

WATNA

Worst Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement: In a negotiation, your WATNA represents one of several paths that you can follow if a resolution cannot be reached. Like its BATNA counterpart, understanding your WATNA is one alternative you can use to compare against your other options along alternative paths in order to make more informed decisions at the bargaining table.

What Happened?

the part of a Òdifficult conversationÓ that addresses disagreements about what has happened or what should happen, whoÕs right and whoÕs wrong. (Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton and Sheila Heen, Difficult Conversations [Viking/Penguin, 1999], 7)

Z

Zero-sum Approach

The tendency to view a negotiation as purely distributive; what one side wins, the other side loses. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 168)

ZOPA

Zone of Possible Agreement: The bargaining range created by the two reservation values. The ZOPA defines a ÒsurplusÓ that must be divided between the parties. (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 19)