When we approach a conflict, most of us instinctively default to positional bargaining, a “dig in your heels” tactic where each side fights for a rigid demand. While common in everything from used car sales to international diplomacy, this tug-of-war approach often leads to stalled agreements and damaged relationships. According to negotiation theorists Roger Fisher and William Ury, the key to a successful outcome isn’t playing “hard” or “soft,” but shifting toward a strategy that prioritizes mutual gain and objective fairness. This article explores why positional bargaining fails to meet the three criteria of a wise negotiation: efficiency, efficacy, and
The Pitfalls of Positional Bargaining & What to Do Instead










