In negotiations, it is not uncommon to feel torn: should you adopt a firm posture, even if it means creating conflict, or be flexible, at the risk of being put at a disadvantage? The Harvard negotiation method offers an alternative path: effective, fair, and sustainable.

Popularized by Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton in Getting to Yes, then enriched with Beyond Reason by Daniel Shapiro, this approach places the interests and emotions of each party at the heart of the process. Today, it is an essential reference, both in terms of commercial negotiations and the amicable resolution of disputes.

1. Change the logic: negotiate on interests, not on positions

Traditional negotiation is often based on a balance of power. Each party sticks to its positions, defends its territory and ends up making more or less hard-won concessions. This logic, called Positional, is a source of ineffective agreements, tensions, and sometimes pure and simple failure.

In contrast, the Harvard method recommends negotiation Principielle, based on four pillars:

  • Distinguishing the people from the problem : do not confuse substantive disagreement with interpersonal conflict. The challenge is to act side by side against a common problem, rather than face to face.
  • Focus on interests : what each party really wants, beyond the requests shown. Behind a rigid position, there are often negotiable needs.
  • Inventing mutually beneficial options : encourage creativity rather than bargaining.
  • Rely on objective criteria : law, uses, technical standards or independent experts can serve as a neutral basis for discussion.

This method is neither soft nor naive. She is exacting in substance, while maintaining a respectful and constructive posture.

2. Don't underestimate the power of emotions

Si Getting to Yes laid the rational foundations for negotiation, Beyond Reason emphasized the human dimension. Because yes, we are not machines. Negotiating is also about feeling — and making people feel.

Emotions, when ignored, can derail the best intentions. On the other hand, when properly managed, they become a powerful lever. Fisher and Shapiro identify five fundamental concerns that influence all human interaction:

  • Appreciation : everyone wants to be heard and recognized.
  • Affiliation : creating a link, even temporary, reinforces cooperation.
  • Autonomy : maintaining freedom of choice is essential.
  • The status : everyone wants their position to be respected.
  • The role : having a clear and valued role in the process is reassuring.

Rather than treating each emotion one by one, it is more effective to meet these five transversal needs. This creates a climate conducive to resolution, even in tense situations.

3. A method applicable to all situations... and to all profiles

The strength of the Harvard method lies in its universality. Whether it is a question of resolving a conflict between partners, negotiating a breach of contract, or managing a disagreement within a family business, its principles adapt to all contexts. They offer a clear, structured, and deeply human framework for reading.

As a lawyer, I chose to make this method a pillar of my support. Because it allows you toavoid judicial escalation when a genuine agreement is still possible. Because it also makes it possible, paradoxically, to better prepare for litigation when it becomes unavoidable.

💬 Are you facing a conflict situation, and do you want to explore amicable options before considering a lawsuit?

👉 Contact me to discuss it.

‍

‍