Worst Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement Wikipedia
When disseminating the information gathered during the analysis, mediators should keep in mind the pedagogical tone. It is very easy for parties to react defensively and hostilely to an analysis that seems threatening and/or exaggerated. Mediators can also remind the parties that this is a “substantive analysis” that can be set aside when the parties return to negotiation in mediation. They do not need to definitively determine what would happen during court mediation or any other alternative route, but they must have a clearer idea of the likely outcomes as possible benchmarks for their negotiations. At the same time, you determine your BATNA, you should also consider alternatives on the other side. Sometimes they may be too optimistic about their options. The more you know about your options, the better you`ll be willing to negotiate. They will be able to develop a more realistic view of results and reasonable offers. Third parties can help thinkers accurately evaluate their BATNas through reality tests and calculations. During the reality tests, the third party helps to clarify and welcome each party`s alternatives to the agreement.
If/he can do so by asking difficult questions about BATNA`s claim: “How could you do that? What would be the result? What would the other side do? How do you know? Or the third party can simply insert new information into the discussion… that the assessment of BATNA by a page is probably wrong. The calculation is a more general approach to the same process… it is a systematic attempt to determine the costs and benefits of all options. In this way, the parties will understand all their alternatives. If this is done together and the parties agree on the evaluation, it will provide a solid basis for finding a negotiated solution better than the alternatives of both parties. But if the parties fail to reach such an agreement, negotiations will collapse and both sides will continue their BATNA instead of a negotiating outcome.