Psychology of Negotiation: Part I – Rethinking “Getting to Yes”

The Counterintuitive Effects of Option Generation in Negotiation

Back in 1981, Roger Fisher and William Ury, authors of the best-seller Getting to Yes, laid out four essential strategies for successful negotiation: (1) separate the people from the problem, (2) focus on interests, not positions, (3) invent options for mutual gain, and (4) insist on using objective criteria. Today, let us dive into the third strategy: inventing options for mutual gain.

Fisher and Ury highlight the importance of generating a wide range of choices when negotiating. They suggest that jumping straight to a single “best” answer can block more thoughtful and effective decision-making. Instead, having multiple options on the table can open up more pathways to a successful agreement. Think of it this way: a winemaker does not rely on just one type of grape but selects from a variety to craft the perfect wine. Similarly, a baseball team sends scouts nationwide to find the best talent. In both cases, exploring multiple possibilities leads to better outcomes. Negotiation is no different. A wise negotiator should consider various options to reach the best possible deal.

Fisher and Ury put it this way: “In a complex situation, creative inventing is an absolute necessity. In any negotiation, it may open doors and produce a range of potential agreements satisfactory to each side. Therefore, generate many options before selecting among them.” Negotiation expert Gerard Nierenberg echoes this sentiment, calling option generation a cornerstone of successful negotiation. Similarly, in their book Beyond Winning, Robert Mnookin, Scott Peppet, and Andrew Tulumello stress that creating options is essential for generating value in negotiations. Other scholars, including Lewicki, Barry, Saunders, and Thompson, also emphasize the importance of generating multiple options during the negotiation process.

Interestingly, other researchers challenge the traditional view that more options are always better. Behavioral decision analysts argue that while having more options can enhance economic outcomes, it can also reduce psychological satisfaction. An abundance of choice can sometimes overwhelm negotiators, leading to lower satisfaction with their decisions.

This raises important questions. How does the number of options affect a negotiator’s choices? And how does having too many options impact satisfaction after a negotiation? These are critical issues in understanding the dynamics of successful negotiation.

This article explores two key aspects of negotiation: how options are generated and the psychology behind making choices. It also examines how the experience of choosing from many options affects satisfaction with the outcome.

The central ideas are as follows. First, having more options does not always lead to better choices and can, in some cases, result in poorer decisions. Second, the way options are presented can influence choices more than negotiators may realize. Finally, satisfaction after a negotiation often depends on the number of options considered during the process.

In the upcoming chapters, we will take a deeper look into the world of decision-making and negotiation. Each chapter builds on the previous one, exploring option generation, the psychological impact of choice, and the real-world application of behavioral psychology in negotiation settings. Together, they offer insights and practical takeaways for anyone interested in the psychology of choice and negotiation.

Our Approach to the Study: Negotiation as a Multidisciplinary Practice

“More and more occasions require negotiation; conflict is a growth industry,” observe Fisher and Ury. Negotiation occurs across all areas of life and at every level of society, drawing on knowledge from a wide range of disciplines. These include behavioral psychology, cognition, emotion, personality, gender, culture, economics, organizational behavior, and consumer behavior. Given these varied influences, a multi-theoretical approach is essential to understanding negotiation strategies.

Scholars agree that the study of negotiation is enriched by diverse perspectives. Gelfand and Gal note that negotiation integrates insights from economics, psychology, political science, sociology, organizational behavior, and even computer science. This convergence contributes to what may be described as a modern “negotiation science.”

Michael Moffitt, a professor at the University of Oregon School of Law, and Robert Bordone, deputy director of the Harvard Negotiation Research Project, emphasize how different academic perspectives examine both how people engage in conflict and how conflicts can be effectively resolved. Law plays a significant role in dispute resolution by providing formal frameworks within which conflicts are addressed. When parties are unable to resolve disputes privately, they often turn to legal processes. However, because legal rules are often broad and general, they benefit from insights drawn from psychology and behavioral science.

The social sciences provide descriptive insight into how people actually make decisions during negotiations, while economics and decision analysis offer normative guidance on how decisions should be made. Psychology is particularly valuable in predicting behavior and informing strategies for managing one’s own actions and those of others. Ethical analysis adds another dimension by examining the moral implications of negotiation tactics, such as the boundaries between candor and deception. Economists focus on efficient allocation of risk and return, while game theorists use simulations to study strategic interaction in controlled settings.

The strength of negotiation research lies in this diversity of perspectives. Attention to interpersonal styles, cultural differences, emotional motivations, social influence, and gender dynamics reveals important insights into how negotiation functions in practice. These factors shape how core elements of negotiation—interests, alternatives, agreements, and value creation—are understood.

While much has been written about achieving optimal economic outcomes in negotiation, this series focuses on the psychology of decision-making and the role of subjective psychological value. These considerations matter because post-negotiation satisfaction can have lasting practical consequences. Understanding negotiation from a psychological perspective requires engagement with multiple theoretical approaches, some of which offer counterintuitive insights.

This discussion draws heavily on research in behavioral decision-making and choice theory. These fields add depth and rigor to the study of negotiation and offer valuable guidance on how better decisions can be made.

REFERENCES

1. Ury, William, and Roger Fisher. Getting to Yes. Roger Fisher, William L. Ury, 1981. Print.

2. Nierenberg, Gerard I., and I. Gerard. The Complete Negotiator. Nierenberg & Zeif Publishers, 1986. Print.

3. Mnookin, Robert H., Scott R. Peppet, and Andrew S. Tulumello. Beyond Winning. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2000. Print.

4. Lewicki, Roy J., Bruce Barry, and David M. Saunders. Essentials of Negotiation. New York: Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 2001. Print.

5. Thompson, Leigh. The Heart and Mind of the Negotiator. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005. Print.

6. Moffitt, Michael L., and Robert C. Bordone. "Perspectives on Dispute Resolution: An Introduction." The Handbook of Dispute Resolution. Ed. Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005. 5. Print.

7. Gelfand, Michele J., and Ya'akov (Kobi) Gal. "Negotiating in a Brave New World: Challenges and Opportunities for the Field of Negotiation Science." The Psychology of Negotiations in the 21st Century Workplace: New Challenges and New Solutions. Ed. Barry Goldman and Debra L. Shapiro. New York: Routledge, 2012. 455. Print.

8. Sebenius, James K. "Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review." Management Science 38.1 (1992): 18-38.

9. Bazerman, Max H., and Katie Shonk. "The Decision Perspective to Negotiation." The Handbook of Dispute Resolution. Ed. Michael L. Moffitt and Robert C. Bordone. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005. 52. Print.

10. Fletcher, Garth, and Margaret S. Clark, eds. Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Interpersonal Processes. John Wiley & Sons, 2002. 209. Print.

11. Burr, Anne M. "Ethics in Negotiation: Does Getting to Yes Require Candor? When is it Okay to Lie?" Dispute Resolution Journal 56.2 (2001): 8-15.

12. Cooter, Robert. "Economic Analysis of Legal Disputes and Their Resolution." Journal of Economic Literature 27 (1989): 1067-1110.

13. Zeckhauser, Richard, Ralph L. Keeney, and James K. Sebenius. Wise Choices: Decisions, Games, and Negotiations. Boston: Harvard Business School, 1996. Print.

14. Goldman, Barry, and Debra L. Shapiro, eds. The Psychology of Negotiations in the 21st Century Workplace: New Challenges and New Solutions. New York: Routledge, 2012. Print.

15. Deutsch, Morton, and Peter T. Coleman, eds. The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000. Print.

16. Moffitt, Michael L., and Robert C. Bordone, eds. The Handbook of Dispute Resolution. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005. Print.