The Intelligent Negotiator by Charles Craver Page B

yourself, you can greatly increase the likelihood of mutually beneficial results. You can also enhance your ability to claim more of the conflicted items for yourself. So long as you are able to obtain what you really value, you should not be disappointed by the fact that your opponent’s interests have also been satisfied. Instead of asking whether you did better than your opponent, ask whether you are pleased with what you got. The fact that your adversary did worse is of little consolation if you also failed to attain beneficial results.
    M ULTIPLE -I TEM N EGOTIATIONS
    Multiple-item negotiations—such as those involving long-term projects, employment contracts, or even divorce proceedings—are complex. Here are a few factors you should keep in mind to be as effective a negotiator as possible. Watch how your counterparts begin this stage of the discussion. Since negotiating over ten or twenty items simultaneously is impossible, multiple-item negotiators breaktheir discussion into manageable segments of three or four topics per segment. Most negotiators begin the talks with a group of either their most or their least important terms, rarely mixing important and unimportant topics. Anxious negotiators usually begin with their most valued terms, hoping to resolve them quickly. This is a risky approach. Both sides may value many of the same items, and when one party begins with the most hotly disputed topics, participants may reach a quick impasse and conclude that the gulf between them is too great to achieve a mutual accord.
    Intelligent Negotiators generally prefer to begin the bargaining process with a discussion of the less significant topics for these reasons:
     
They want to generate quick agreement on these less controversial items. If things progress well, they should be able to reach tentative agreements on many, if not most, of these terms before they get to the more conflicted items.
They want to create a psychological commitment to the bargaining process. By initially focusing on the areas of agreement, rather than the areas of disagreement, these parties are able to agree—tentatively—on many terms, creating a psychological commitment to the bargaining process. As they move toward the more controversial topics, they remember how many terms have already been resolved, and the remaining items no longer seem insurmountable.
    Look closely at the groups of items with which your counterparts initiate the serious talks. If they open the discussions with a group of four items, three of which are insignificant to you, but one of which you value, your opponents probably consider all four to be relatively unimportant.If you can exchange the term you value for one or two of the other items during the preliminary exchange, you will obtain a real gain at minimal cost to yourself.
    On the other hand, if opponents begin with four items, three of which you value and one of which you do not, they probably value all four terms. Try to trade the item you do not value for one of the three you consider important. Don’t feel guilty about the fact that you may be obtaining a valuable term for something you do not personally value. When determining the importance of bargaining chips, remember this: The value of items being exchanged is in the eye of the beholder. If I have something you want, you will pay a reasonable price to get it. If you don’t value what I possess, you will give me nothing important for it even if others indicate that they think the item is valuable.
    Overstating and Understating Value
    Do not forget that fellow negotiators—even friends and business associates in some cases—may employ deceptive bargaining tactics to obtain an advantage. They may overstate or understate the value of certain items for strategic reasons. As you might do yourself (as discussed above), when your bargaining counterparts think you value something they don’t care about, they may indicate an interest in that term. Conversely,