Use Collaborating when the relationship and the solution both matter
Collaborating — high assertive, high cooperative — finds a solution that genuinely works for both parties, but it takes time.
Key takeaways
- What it is: Collaborating — high assertive, high cooperative — finds a solution that genuinely works for both parties, but it takes time.
- Why it works: Collaboration requires both parties to put their underlying needs on the table and work toward an integrative solution — one that satisfies both sets of needs rather than splitting the difference. It works because it addresses the actual interests behind stated positions, not just the positions themselves. The cost is time and psychological safety — both parties must be willing to be honest about what they actually need, which is only possible when the relationship can sustain that honesty.
- Evidence: Backed by observational / correlational evidence.
- Avoid: Calling a meeting "collaborative" while actually committed to a predetermined outcome — pseudo-collaboration burns trust faster than honest Competing would.
Why it works
Collaboration requires both parties to put their underlying needs on the table and work toward an integrative solution — one that satisfies both sets of needs rather than splitting the difference. It works because it addresses the actual interests behind stated positions, not just the positions themselves. The cost is time and psychological safety — both parties must be willing to be honest about what they actually need, which is only possible when the relationship can sustain that honesty.
How to do it
- 1Before the conversation, ask: what is my underlying need here, beneath my stated position? What might theirs be?
- 2Open by naming the shared interest: "I want us both to walk away with something that actually works."
- 3Explore options that weren’t in either opening position — the integrative solution is usually not either/or.
What the evidence says
ObservationalInterest-based negotiation research (Fisher & Ury, Getting to Yes) demonstrates that surfacing underlying interests and searching for integrative solutions produces more durable agreements than positional bargaining.
Honest caveat: Collaboration requires mutual good faith and sufficient time; in adversarial or power-imbalanced situations, Collaborating can be exploited by a Competing counterpart.
- — Fisher, R. & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin.
Common mistake
Calling a meeting "collaborative" while actually committed to a predetermined outcome — pseudo-collaboration burns trust faster than honest Competing would.
IX Coach prepares you for a collaborative conversation by helping you surface your own underlying interests before you go in, so you can name them honestly rather than defending positions.
Practice this with IX Coach →