Rationality means removing bias, not toughness
Bazerman argues negotiating rationally is about eliminating systematic cognitive errors, not being aggressive or tricky. The gains come from thinking clearly where opponents think badly.
Negotiating rationally
6 ideas
The fixed-pie assumption
Negotiators wrongly assume interests are directly opposed, missing trades that could enlarge value for both. Recognizing differing priorities unlocks integrative, win-win agreements.
Anchoring and the framing of offers
The first number anchors the negotiation, and whether an outcome feels like a gain or loss changes willingness to settle. Skilled negotiators manage anchors and reframe others' reference points.
Irrational escalation of commitment
People throw good money after bad to justify prior choices, escalating in auctions and disputes past any rational stopping point. Awareness of sunk-cost pull is a defense against it.
Overconfidence and the winner's curse
Negotiators overestimate their positions and, when they win a competitive bid, often overpay because winning means everyone else valued it lower. Anticipating the other side's information corrects this.
Think about the other side's decision
Bazerman's central prescription is to reason through the opponent's likely decisions and information before acting. Perspective-taking, not just self-analysis, is what makes strategy rational.