Fisher and Ury's 'Getting to Yes': A Critique: The Shortcomings of the Principled Bargaining Model

19 Pages Posted: 23 Oct 2017

Date Written: May 1, 2013

Abstract

Lawyers negotiate everyday. Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and William Ury was written as a guide for those engaging in negotiation, and it is often considered to be the most influential approach in current negotiation theory. Getting to Yes advances a model of negotiation called 'principled bargaining', which seeks to use objective negotiating criteria in an attempt to reach the best possible outcome for both sides. However, Getting to Yes has been widely criticised. This paper analyses the shortcomings of the principles advanced by Fisher and Ury in the context of lawyer-led negotiations. It concludes that while the theory of principled bargaining has some major limitations that cannot be overlooked, it may be a preferable alternative and in many situations ought to be attempted in the first instance.

Keywords: Negotiation, mediation, Fisher and Ury, principled bargaining, adversarial bargaining, dispute resolution

Suggested Citation

McKeown, Tessa, Fisher and Ury's 'Getting to Yes': A Critique: The Shortcomings of the Principled Bargaining Model (May 1, 2013). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3054357 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3054357

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
2,556
Abstract Views
6,423
Rank
10,106
PlumX Metrics