Editing Negotiation (section)

== <span style="color: #FFFFFF;">Evaluating</span> ==
Criteria for evaluating a negotiation outcome:

# '''Did both parties do better than their BATNA?''' If not, one party would have been better off walking away.
# '''Was value left on the table?''' A Pareto-efficient outcome is one where neither party could be made better off without making the other worse off. Many negotiated deals are not Pareto-efficient.
# '''Was the process perceived as fair?''' Deals that feel procedurally unfair often fail to be implemented fully, even when the terms are acceptable on paper.
# '''Does the relationship remain intact?''' In ongoing relationships, the quality of the process matters as much as the outcome.

Expert practitioners distinguish between:

* '''Hard bargaining''' � useful in one-shot, purely distributive contexts (e.g., selling a car to a stranger). Aggressive anchors, minimal disclosure, slow concessions.
* '''Principled negotiation''' (from Fisher & Ury's ''Getting to Yes'') � separating people from the problem, focusing on interests, generating options, insisting on objective criteria. More effective in complex or repeated interactions.
* '''Adaptive negotiation''' � reading the other party's style and adjusting accordingly. Some counterparts respond to relationship-building; others to data and logic; others to authority cues. Mismatching styles causes friction independent of the substantive issues.
</div>

<div style="background-color: #2F4F4F; color: #FFFFFF; padding: 20px; border-radius: 8px; margin-bottom: 15px;">