Fairly harmless, not overly helpful but also an easy read

This book shows you strategies that can be used during negotiations. Most of them are probably well known to you, but you couldn't name it. It's a good summary of tools that we have and that we should be aware of during negotiations. Tools used to enhance our ability to negotiate.

What I’ve missed in the book were examples of dialogue on which I can learn. Saying go try it does not make me know how I might react. I could practice negotiation, but it would be nice to have some test scenarios.

If you want be get better at negotiating this is a good place to start. Based on scientific research Getting to YES has withstood the test of time and still bares relevance 30 years after its original publication but that doesn’t make it an easy read.

Takeaways:
•tCreate a BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement
•t Prepare before every negotiation
•tListening and showing that you have understood will bring you far
•tFocus on the problem and relate it to principles and standards

One could critique Getting to YES for stating the obvious which is luckily done by the authors themselves. But even though they manage to foreshadow some flaws they did not dodge the biggest one.

The biggest flaw in the book is that it is obvious that it has two writers with different writing styles. This makes the book a difficult read is some paragraphs consists of short bursts of sentences whereas others are one entire sentence. I do not mind either but would have liked an editor to clean up the syntax and make it a more even read.

I liked Getting to Yes and will be using it a thesaurus when in need of guidance on how to conduct negotiations on micro and macro levels. Getting to YES is a quick read but has lacks in the readability department. Otherwise, it is a recommended read.

This book was a rather interesting read! Overall, I felt that this book has really broadened my perspective on how to approach conflict while also teaching me ways on how to negotiate better, as well as and be more open-minded to hearing different stance. It provides insightful and practical ways on to strive toward a mutually beneficial agreement without having to give in. Before reading this book, I used to think that people have conflicts because they have different personalities or ‘just don’t vibe well together’, but while reading the book, it revealed to me that conflicts arise due to the misalignment in interests and priorities. What is interesting to me is how Fisher talks about “focusing on interests, not positions”. Often times, we assume that there’s only 2 sides to the problem — “yes” and “no”, “agree” and “disagree”, “right” and wrong”. As a result, we don’t see the need to communicate and understand other party’s interests because it might seem as if we are giving in. However in reality, it helps us better understand the root cause of the problem, making it easier for us to find a common ground to a more integrative solution.

As I was reading this book, I was also reminded of what I learnt in my business class: The tale of the two sisters. The sisters were fighting over an orange and to resolve the problem, they cut the orange into half (each take half an orange). It seems like a logical approach to the conflict. However, the thing is, one wanted the orange peel to make a cake, and another wanted the flesh to make orange juice. By the time the sisters realise this, it was too late because one had already thrown away the flesh for the cake, another had already thrown away the peel for the juice, essentially, they only had half an orange. They could have a whole orange if they were to communicate to each other their interests (’why I want the orange’) rather than focusing on the positions (’I just need the orange’).

I was shocked to see that this was first written in 1991. Not only is it relevant today, it is a far more balanced and fair approach to negotiating. No sensationalism. Simply good advice about how to think and talk to others when trying to compromise.

This book is great for diving deep into the topic of negotiations. I compared this book's teachings with the 1957 film '12 Angry Men' directed by Sidney Lumet, whose original 1954 teleplay was by Reginald Rose. There will be spoilers for 12 Angry Men.

Fisher Talks about the acronym of 'PIOC', which stands for 'people', 'interest', 'options' and 'criteria'. I want to talk about the first alphabet, 'P' for 'People', which elaborates to “separating the people from the problem”. Juror #8, the protagonist of the film, demonstrates a remarkable ability to separate the people from the problem. Fisher, says that in order to do this, “the participants should come to see themselves as working side by side, attacking the problem, not each other”. When the jury first convenes, he notices the tension and emotional baggage carried by some of the jurors, such as juror #3, when he pulled out a photograph of him and his son while he lamented on about the younger generation respecting their fathers. Rather than engaging in confrontations or escalating emotions, Juror #8 makes a conscious effort to acknowledge and respect their feelings without making them the focal point of the discussion. He continuously repeats his stance on 'not guilty', and does not bring up other people’s possible personalities, such as Juror #3’s temper.

Basically obvious points that suggest that strategic action (unimpeded by irrational emotion or ego-based dynamics) is oftentimes closely aligned with common sense!

This is also such an American book, to assume that asking your counterparty to defer to objective and fair criteria is a viable and high-leverage strategy. Principled negotiation works best if your interests are satisfied by principled resolution -- this book is not for somebody looking to get more than their fair share! Negotiation, popularly conceived, is about forcing your counterparty to submit to an agreement which is advantageous to you. Negotiation as conceived in GtY is about finding ways to maximize total surplus resulting from a given agreement, without compromising your own share of the pie. This is pretty crazy! I'd bet that any culture in which the frameworks outlined in this book are popularly adopted/widely respected must outperform others on a relative basis.

Well written. Solid theories. Not surprising, but things I "knew all along" as they put it, but now explained a bit. Felt like a nicer version of a school textbook however, and kind of boring at times. Time well spent reading it though.

As the author wrote towards the ending, "This book is about how to "win" that important game — how to achieve a better process for dealing with your differences.". Not about how to win an argument or any such thing. It makes no claim at introducing brand new ideas, but aims simply at organizing a lot of what you may already know are good or bad practices in negotiation, and structuring the reasons why they work - or don't. I walked out with 6 pages of notes, so for me it was worth it.

I read this for school

This book is short and sweet. Condensed language and examples provide exemplary methods for understanding negotiations. The book elaborates greatly on the important points that need to be recognized during and after negotiations. By the time I had finished the first chapter I had already agreed in my mind to read this again, as the second soak always absorbs more. In the case of this book I believe you could read it every single day and apply it to a daily dose of negotiations you enter into without your conscious knowledge.

Its important to understand as pointed out, reading a book on athleticism will not make you physically fit, however, this book will give you the necessary mind meat that you need to begin growing in negotiations.

Everything in life, can be a negotiation. This book gives a powerful lesson on staying focused on the issues rather than the positions.

Recommended for everyone. Easy to read.