Interests, Positions, Needs, and Values: Additional Resources

These references supplement the Knowledge Base Essay, Interests, Positions, Needs, and Values.

Additional Explanations of the Underlying Concepts:

Online (Web) Sources

(K) Conflict Research Consortium. Confusing Interests (What You Really Want) with Positions (What You Say You Want). Univeristy of Colorado.
Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/problem/intpos-p.htm  [Backup Link]
This article disucesses the differences between interests and positions. It also talks about reframing an issue to make it seem less like a win-lose situation.

(K) Conflict Research Consortium. Confusing Material Interests with Fundamental Human Needs. University of Colorado.
Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/problem/intnds-p.htm  [Backup Link]
This article talks about the differences between material interests and human needs. Material needs tend to be tangible things, while human needs are more conceptual and contribute to more of a state of mind.

(K) Cohen, Steven P. Focusing On Interests Rather Than Positions -- Conflict Resolution Key. Mediate.com.
Available at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/tnsc.cfm  [Backup Link]
This article lists six suggestions that if followed can reduce conflict and turn it into cooperation: separate the people from the problem; distinguish between interests and positions; consider your BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement); silence is golden; pursue fairness; and only one person can get angry at a time.

(K) Conflict Research Consortium. Interest-Based Framing. University of Colorado.
Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/treatment/intframe.htm  [Backup Link]
This essay talks about reframing an issue to based on the interests the parties have.

(?) Currie, Cris M. "When Interest-Based Bargaining Is Not Enough." ,
Available at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/currie3.cfm  [Backup Link]

The author examines two recent works, one readily available and the other relatively inaccessible, that attempt to shed some light on the complex subject of seemingly intractable human conflict, Moral Conflict: When Social Worlds Collide by W. Barnett Pearce and Stephen W. Littlejohn (Sage Publications, 1997), and When the Parties Bring Their Gods to the Table: Learning Lessons from Waco, a 1998 doctoral dissertation for George Mason University by Jayne S. Docherty.

Offline (Print) Sources

(?) Ury, William L., Jeanne M. Brett and Stephen B. Goldberg. Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Cost of Conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, November 1988.
This book explains how to diagnose and correct problems in an existing dispute-resolution system as well as create and implement a new system where one does not exist. The three approaches to resolving disputes are interests, rights and power. While reconciling interests is the least costly of these options, this is not always possible. Some issues are of extreme public importance and some concerns should not be compromised. Primary Link

(?) Fisher, Roger, William Ury and Bruce Patton. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin Books, January 1, 1981.
The 2nd edition to this famous book goes over the authors' method (separate the people from the problem; focus on interests, not positions; invent options for mutual gain; insist on using objective criteria; BATNA; hardball) and then adds updated material at the end of the book on dealing with cultural differences, fairness issues, amoral people, tactics and power imbalances.

(?) Fisher, Roger, William L. Ury and Bruce Patton. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, 2nd Edition . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., April 1992.
This is an updated version of Roger Fisher's and William Ury's classic 1981 text, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. In this bestseller, Fisher, Ury, and Patton describe what they call "principled negotiation", which is basically interest-based bargaining with a few extra twists. Key ideas include: 1) separate the people from the problem; 2) negotiate interests, not positions; 3) look for mutually beneficial options; and 4) use objective criteria. This work is considered essential foundational reading for anyone interested in negotiation. Primary Link [Backup Link]

(D) Lax, David and James Sebenius. "Interests: The Measure of Negotiation." Negoitation Theory and Practice , January 1, 1991.
This essay discusses how the interests of negotiators themselves play into the negotiation process. The authors also make an effort to clearly distinguish various types of interests from one another as well as distinguish interests from issues and positions. They note that in some instances, commitment to a position is the most effective way to claim value in a dispute.

KM

Return to Top