How does "Make multiple equivalent simultaneous offers (MESOs)" work?

When you offer multiple packages at once, the other party’s choice reveals which issues they value most — information you couldn’t get by asking directly. That signal lets you repackage the deal to give them more of what they care about in exchange for more of what you care about, creating joint gains that a single take-it-or-leave-it offer forecloses.

How does "Use a post-settlement settlement to improve a deal after agreement" work?

The pressure of reaching agreement often locks negotiators into the first workable deal rather than the best possible one. A post-settlement settlement (PSS) reduces that pressure: both sides commit to the current deal as a floor, then explore alternatives with nothing to lose. Because the fallback is secured, both sides can take creative risks they wouldn’t take earlier.

How does "Logroll by trading issues of unequal importance" work?

Logrolling works because two parties rarely have identical preferences across every issue. When party A values price more than timeline, and party B values timeline more than price, a trade where A gets better price and B gets better timeline leaves both ahead of any equal split. The mechanism is simple arbitrage of differing marginal values.

How does "Write contingent contracts when forecasts disagree" work?

Negotiators often deadlock because each side genuinely believes the world will unfold in their favor. A contingent contract converts that disagreement into a bet: if my prediction is right, the terms tilt my way; if yours is right, they tilt yours. It resolves the impasse without either side having to abandon their belief, and aligns incentives with performance.

How does "Run a negotiation debrief to learn what value was left on the table" work?

Negotiators routinely leave joint gains unclaimed because they never learn what the other side actually valued. A structured debrief — where both sides reveal their priority rankings after the deal — makes the missed trades visible, building the skill of interest-spotting for future negotiations. The debrief itself creates no risk since the deal is already closed.

How does "Map the ZOPA before negotiating" work?

The zone of possible agreement (ZOPA) is the range between each side’s reservation price — the point at which they’d prefer no deal. Without a clear sense of where the ZOPA sits, negotiators either anchor too low (leaving money behind) or anchor outside the zone (breaking the conversation before it starts). Mapping the ZOPA in advance anchors the first offer optimally.

Malhotra & Bazerman

How do you create more value in a negotiation instead of just dividing what exists?

The integrative negotiation practices that create value before you claim it

Short answer

Expanding the pie means trading across issues that the two parties value differently, so both sides gain more than any fixed compromise would allow. Malhotra and Bazerman’s research shows that most negotiators leave joint gains on the table because they treat every issue as a zero-sum battle.

Most people enter a negotiation ready to split the difference. That works if one thing is on the table, but in almost every real negotiation multiple issues are live at once — and the parties rarely care about them equally. Malhotra and Bazerman’s integrative framework starts with a diagnostic question: where do our interests differ, and can those differences be turned into trades? The practices below draw on that framework, grounded in the mechanism of each, with an honest read on the evidence.

The practices (7)

Why it works

Positions are claimed outcomes (“I need $80k”); interests are the underlying needs that position is meant to satisfy (“I need to cover rent and save for a car”). When parties expose interests, they often discover the overlap or complementarity that makes a trade possible. Staying at the position level eliminates options before they can be seen.

How to do it

1State your own interest, not just your position, early in the conversation.
2Ask "What’s driving that number for you?" or "What would having that solve for you?"
3Listen for multiple interests behind a single stated position — there are usually several.
4Map the interests of both sides before proposing anything.

Evidence

Observational

The distinction between interests and positions is foundational to the Harvard Negotiation Project and is consistent with dual-concern theory, which shows that attending to both sides’ concerns predicts better joint outcomes than positional bargaining.

Honest caveat: Most evidence is from structured negotiation exercises and practitioner observation; controlled trials isolating this single move are limited.

— Fisher, Ury & Patton (1991), Getting to Yes — the foundational interests-vs-positions framework

Common mistake: Asking “why do you want that?” in a tone that reads as challenge rather than curiosity, which causes the other side to defend their position more rigidly.

Go deeper on this practice →

Practice this with IX Coach

Reading about a practice changes nothing on its own. IX Coach turns these into a guided, adaptive routine — discerning where you are in real time and walking the practice with you, session after session.

Start with IX Coach →