The ink is barely dry on the breakthrough agreement reached this week with Iran, requiring that country to eliminate most of its nuclear weapons capacity in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions, and many critics are already out in full force decrying the agreement. It seems remarkable that they could be so sure of their opposition without having had much time to read or study the text, or consider carefully whether this deal is better than the alternative of continued conflict. (In previous posts–here and here–on this topic, I outlined the way in which I think any negotiated agreement should be evaluated, not by comparing it to the outcome each side would have preferred, but instead by comparing it […]
Here is Secretary of State John Kerry reporting on the progress of negotiations with Iran. His statement should sound familiar to a lot of mediators: on continuing negotiations so long as progress is being made, on the importance of building an agreement that will last, on the need to avoid being rushed or constrained by arbitrary deadlines, and at the same time on recognizing that difficult decisions need to be made soon if agreement is to be reached.
A mediator I know was explaining his system of taking and cataloging notes from his mediation sessions, to help him learn what was working and not working. He writes down phrases he has used that seem particularly effective, and keeps them on note cards. And he sometimes thumbs through his stack of cards during subsequent mediations to see if he can find something useful. According to this mediator, impasse does not exist. Instead, when parties get stuck, he prefers to tell them only that the dispute probably will not settle that day, preserving the hope that it will settle at a later time when the parties are ready. I have also found that the concept of impasse is not particularly […]
Last week we heard the news of the strangely untimely death of mathematician John Nash, whose life story was made famous in the book and film “A Beautiful Mind.” The Nash equilibrium is a concept sometimes touched upon in teaching negotiation theory, and it’s not difficult to understand why we should try to understand it, even if we might have trouble doing the math. What Nash and others taught us that is especially relevant to conflict resolution is that parties involved in conflict will often rationally both choose a sub-optimal outcome for themselves. Therefore they will benefit from learning how to be more cooperative with their adversary. That means Nash’s mathematical theory helps prove the usefulness of mediators or some […]
A long time ago, when I was fairly new at law practice, I represented a plaintiff in a contentious sexual harassment case against a large company. After a series of pre-trial battles, the defendant’s counsel opened the door to the possibility of settlement, throwing out an insultingly low-ball number. I wasn’t sure how to respond. At that point in my career, I thought I knew how to litigate, but nobody had ever taught me how to negotiate. I had never received any training in negotiation strategy in law school, and very little at my law firm. The subject simply wasn’t taught at the time. So I honestly didn’t know the best number to come back with in order to lead […]