Skip to content
SponsoredShip your own knowledge site with Vincony
Vinthony

Negotiation basics

Negotiation is one of the highest-leverage skills in adult life and one of the most under-practiced. This page covers the core ideas (BATNA, anchoring, value creation, the difference between positions and interests) and how to use them in ordinary situations — salary, contracts, prices, family.

Last updated 30 May 2026 Evidence-awareReport a correction

The right frame

The dominant framing of negotiation in popular culture — combative, zero-sum, the hard-nosed deal-maker — is the worst possible frame for most situations. The Harvard Negotiation Project's framing has been the dominant academic and professional view for 40 years: ‘hard on the problem, soft on the people,’ with both sides looking for solutions that meet the underlying interests of both, not just the stated positions.

This isn't soft. It often produces better outcomes for the negotiator using it than the combative version, because the relationship doesn't break and the other side stops defending. It also makes negotiation less unpleasant, which is what stops most adults from doing it.

BATNA

BATNA — Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement — is the single most important concept in negotiation theory. It's the floor below which you'll walk away.

The strength of your negotiating position is almost entirely set by your BATNA. If you have other offers, other suppliers, other apartments to view, your BATNA is strong. If you don't, your BATNA is weak and no amount of tactical brilliance can fully compensate.

The practical implication: most of the work happens before the conversation. Improve your BATNA. Get another job offer. Get a competing quote. Have a fallback plan. Then walk in to the negotiation already willing to leave.

Positions vs interests

Positions are what people say they want. Interests are what they actually need. The two often differ.

The salary negotiation example: position is ‘I want £80k.’ Interest might be: enough money to live in a specific area, a particular job title for the next CV, signal of being valued, autonomy on the work, hours that fit family. If the employer can't move on £80k but can on title, remote-work allowance, equity, holiday, or learning budget, you've found value where the stated positions had collapsed.

The move is to surface interests on both sides. Ask ‘what's most important to you about this?’ or ‘what would make this work for you?’ The conversation almost always changes when interests rather than positions are on the table.

Anchoring

The first number put on the table influences the rest of the conversation more than most people realise. This is anchoring, and it's one of the most replicated findings in negotiation research.

When you know the range and have decent information, anchor first — at the top of what you can justify. The justification matters more than the number; an unjustified high anchor reads as bluff, a well-supported high anchor reads as serious.

When you don't have good information, let them anchor and then re-anchor with your own number plus the reasoning. The mistake is to accept their anchor as the starting point and negotiate down from there.

Creating value before claiming it

Most negotiation pies aren't fixed in size — they can be enlarged before the splitting starts. Adding components (longer term, larger volume, different timing, alternative delivery), trading items where you and the other side value them differently, finding shared problems both sides can solve together — all of these enlarge the pie.

The classic move: list everything in the deal and rank each item's importance to you. Then ask the other side to rank theirs. Trade items that rank low for you and high for them, and vice versa. Both sides leave better off.

Practical situations

Salary. Research the range. Practice the conversation. Have a competing offer or be willing to walk. Make the first offer at the top of the defensible range, with reasoning. Negotiate total package (base, bonus, equity, signing, holiday, remote, learning budget) not just salary. Never accept on the spot; ask for 24 hours.

Buying a house or car. Get multiple comparable quotes. Use one to negotiate against another. Walk away once visibly; the call back often comes. Have your max number in writing to yourself before starting.

Freelance / contracting rates. Price the project, not the hours. Anchor with a number that reflects the value to them, not the time to you. If the price is rejected, change the scope or terms before reducing the rate.

Family / interpersonal.Same principles apply, just slower. Surface interests, not positions. Don't negotiate in the same conversation where you raised the issue.

Common mistakes

  1. Skipping the BATNA work and walking in weak.
  2. Treating positions as the actual disagreement.
  3. Accepting on the spot when 24 hours would have produced a better offer.
  4. Justifying your number too much and signalling flexibility you didn't mean.
  5. Filling the silence after your offer.
  6. Negotiating only the salary number and ignoring the rest of the package.
  7. Confusing combat with effectiveness.

Related

Sources

The references we lean on most heavily for this topic. We've tried to cite the strongest evidence on each claim rather than the most-cited summary. Reading the primary sources will always beat secondary write-ups — including ours.

FAQ

Is silence really a negotiation tool?
Yes, more than most people use. Once you've made an offer or counter, stop talking. The discomfort the other person feels in the silence often produces movement. Filling the silence yourself — explaining, justifying, hedging — reliably weakens your position.
Should I make the first offer or wait?
Make the first offer when you have decent information about the range; let them open when you don't. The anchoring effect of the first number is real and consistent across negotiation research. The exception is when you genuinely don't know the range and could anchor far from market; then ask for theirs first.
What if I'm bad at confrontation?
Good negotiation isn't confrontation. The Harvard Negotiation Project framing is ‘hard on the problem, soft on the people.’ You can be warm, curious, and collaborative while still pushing hard on the substance. The conflation of negotiation with conflict is what produces most under-negotiation.
Is BATNA the single most important concept?
Close to it. Your Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement is the floor you'll walk away to. The strength of your position is almost entirely set by your BATNA, not by tactics. Improving your BATNA before negotiating (other offers, time, options) usually beats negotiating harder.
Are there gender differences?
Research consistently finds women under-negotiate relative to men and face more backlash when they negotiate the same way. The negotiation literature increasingly recognises that ‘just ask more aggressively’ is unhelpful framing; collaborative, value-creating approaches work for everyone and don't produce the same backlash.
What about negotiations with no information asymmetry?
Salary at a small private company, used-car prices in a fragmented market, freelance rates in a niche — all examples where information asymmetry is large. Time spent on research before negotiating (Glassdoor, market reports, asking peers, getting comparable quotes) is usually higher-leverage than any tactic.