The principles of win-win negotiation show that creating value at the bargaining table isn’t only about getting a strong deal for yourself. Lasting agreements also depend on whether your counterpart feels satisfied with the outcome and the process that produced it.
Research shows that satisfaction in negotiation is shaped by several factors, including outcome expectations, perceptions of fairness, comparisons with others, and the overall negotiation experience itself.
Understanding and managing these elements helps negotiators build agreements that hold up over time—and preserve relationships for future collaboration.
Claim your FREE copy: Win-Win or Hardball
Discover how to handle complicated, high-level business negotiations in this free report, Win-Win or Hardball: Learn Top Strategies from Sports Contract Negotiations, from Harvard Law School.
Keeping Your Bargaining Partner Happy: Satisfaction in Negotiation Outcomes
Win-Win Negotiation Example 1: Outcome Expectations
Before and during negotiations, people naturally form expectations about the deal they believe they will receive. Research by Richard Oliver and Bruce Barry of Vanderbilt University and Sundar Balakrishnan of the University of Washington shows that negotiators instinctively compare their final result with what they expected going in.
Because of this, two people can receive identical outcomes yet feel very differently about the deal.
Consider two car buyers who both purchase the same model vehicle for $30,000. One buyer expected to pay $29,000 and leaves dissatisfied. The other expected to pay $31,000 and feels pleased with the result—even though both paid the same price.
Skilled negotiators recognize the importance of expectations and manage them carefully throughout discussions.
Managers often do this instinctively. Before salary negotiations, leaders may explain that the company has had a difficult year. With expectations lowered, employees may feel satisfied even with modest increases.
Your own reactions can also shape expectations. A surprised expression, hesitation, or pause after hearing an offer may lower the other side’s expectations about what’s possible within the zone of possible agreement (ZOPA). Conversely, appearing overly eager can unintentionally raise expectations.
A common mistake occurs when negotiators make large concessions too quickly. Doing so may cause the other side to assume further concessions are coming.
Imagine bidding on a home listed at $390,000. You open at $300,000. The seller counters at $385,000. Wanting to close the gap, you jump to $340,000—close to your limit. The seller may now assume you can easily move another $40,000 and delay agreement, expecting more movement.
A related mistake is agreeing too quickly to demands. Research by Adam Galinsky, Victoria Medvec, Vanessa Seiden, and Peter Kim shows that negotiators whose initial offers were immediately accepted felt less satisfied—even when they achieved better outcomes—because they wondered what more they could have gained.
Ironically, immediate agreement can reduce satisfaction. Sometimes allowing negotiation to unfold—and even requesting small additional concessions—leads to a more satisfying win-win outcome for both sides.
- Give your counterpart a genuine voice in discussions
- Invite their ideas and concerns
- Acknowledge their perspective
- Explain decisions and constraints clearly
Win-Win Negotiation Example 2: Perceptions of Your Outcome
Negotiators judge outcomes not only by what they gain but also by how well they believe their counterpart did.
This lesson became painfully clear in 2003 when American Airlines management asked employee unions to accept deep wage and benefit concessions as the airline struggled financially. After difficult negotiations, unions agreed to cuts ranging from roughly 15% to over 20%.
But satisfaction collapsed when employees learned executives had secured large retention bonuses and protected pensions for themselves. Once this information became public through regulatory filings, union leaders withdrew support, and CEO Donald Carty soon resigned.
Research by George Loewenstein, Leigh Thompson, and Max Bazerman shows that negotiator satisfaction depends heavily on social utility—how outcomes compare across parties. Workers were willing to sacrifice, but only if executives shared the burden.
The lesson for negotiators: avoid appearing to “win too much.” Acknowledge your counterpart’s contributions and bargaining strength rather than highlighting your own gains.
Claim your FREE copy: Win-Win or Hardball
Discover how to handle complicated, high-level business negotiations in this free report, Win-Win or Hardball: Learn Top Strategies from Sports Contract Negotiations, from Harvard Law School.
Win-Win Negotiation Example 3: Social Comparisons
Negotiators also evaluate outcomes based on what others in similar situations receive.
Research by Maurice Schweitzer and Nathan Novemsky shows that people compare not only with their counterpart but also with peers. A car buyer who pays more than a neighbor for the same car may feel cheated—even if the deal was objectively good.
Yet social comparisons are often incomplete or misleading. We tend to compare ourselves with those closest to us, and information is often selectively shared. Companies may discourage salary discussions, and friends may brag about wins while hiding losses.
As a negotiator, recognize the limits of social comparisons. If aiming for a win-win outcome, you can also guide comparisons. For instance, management in labor talks may reference industry contracts showing terms less generous than those being offered, helping place proposals in context.
Win-Win Negotiation Example 4: The Negotiation Experience Itself
Negotiation satisfaction depends not only on outcomes but also on the fairness of the process used to reach them.
Research on procedural justice by Jerald Greenberg shows that people are more satisfied when they feel the process was fair—even when results are not ideal.
To strengthen perceptions of fairness:
Even when you hold more power, allowing participation increases acceptance of outcomes.
Providing clear explanations for difficult decisions may take time, but it helps preserve trust and prevents future disputes—creating a true win-win result.
Final Thought: Satisfaction Sustains Agreements
A negotiation isn’t truly successful if one side leaves resentful. Agreements endure when both sides feel respected, fairly treated, and reasonably satisfied with both outcome and process.
That’s what ultimately turns a deal into a win-win.
What else would you add to this list of win-win negotiation strategies?
Related Win-Win Negotiations Article: Business Negotiations: Win-Win Strategy for Hospices de Beaune Vineyards
Claim your FREE copy: Win-Win or Hardball
Discover how to handle complicated, high-level business negotiations in this free report, Win-Win or Hardball: Learn Top Strategies from Sports Contract Negotiations, from Harvard Law School.
Originally posted in 2013.
No Responses to “Win-Win Negotiation: How to Keep Your Bargaining Partner Satisfied”