Getting to YES or Getting YOUR SHARE?
GETTING TO YES OR GETTING YOUR SHARE?
RETHINKING NEGOTIATION IN TODAY’S WORLD
For years, negotiation was framed around two main schools of thought.
On one side the traditional Positional Bargaining where parties are building positions trying to find an agreement through haggling, positional posturing and clever ways of dominating the opponent.
On the other, you had Getting to Yes — the gold standard of Interest Based Negotiation.
A method built on empathy, mutual interest, and the idea that both sides can win if motivations are understood, and communication is clear.
Now with the slowdown in globalization and the rise of power negotiation (exemplified by a Donald Trump like approach) it seems that the picture is getting more difficult.
This new approach is tougher. It teaches you to open high, use maximum leverage, and dominate — even if it means pushing the other party to their limits. The goal isn’t fairness; it’s to win, ideally, big. It is in one way or another an extreme form of positional bargaining without the pretense.
At first glance, the aforementioned philosophies seem to have nothing in common.
And yet, they are both responses to the world we live in.
The Changing Landscape: From Growing Pies to Zero-Sum Tables
In the decades behind us, globalization, expansion, and innovation led to larger markets. New customers, growing markets (China, India), and new demand meant that in many industries, the pie was getting bigger. This is especially the case in the automotive industry, where car volumes were projected to reach 100 million cars per year by 2025. Negotiation, in that context, could afford to be generous. Focusing on interests and motivations made sense because there was always more to go around.
But that’s changed.
Today, many markets are no longer expanding. The reality is different not only in terms of actual volume, but also in terms of predatory pricing and intense competition (exemplified in China and India).
Some markets are stagnating and saturated. In some sectors, they are even shrinking. At the same time, profitability is under enormous pressure. Margins are getting thinner, costs are rising, and expectations from stakeholders, boards, and shareholders remain high.
In this environment, negotiation is no longer about sharing the growing pie. It’s about how much of the existing pie you can secure and still walk away with the relationship intact.
When Win-Win No Longer Works
In theory, a win-win outcome is always desirable. But what happens when both parties need to win more just to stay alive?
What if a supplier can’t lower their price, and customers cannot pay more?
What if both companies are fighting for the same limited customer base and only one can walk away with the deal?
This is the reality we’re now seeing in a variety of different businesses, and it affects all sales and contract negotiations across industries.
And it’s forcing us to ask: Is the classic “Getting to Yes” approach enough?
Or has the time come to rethink how we negotiate?
Neither Soft nor Hard: A Third Way Forward
In my own experience, and I say this after years of negotiating on both sides of the table, none of the extreme approaches work on its own.
The Getting to Yes model is elegant, respectful, and ideal for long-term relationships. But in markets under intense pressure, it often leads to one-sided compromises or leaves value on the table simply because we’re afraid to push harder.
The aggressive/positional style (“take-all-you-can”) is powerful in the short term. But it burns trust, creates resentment, and damages the relationships we need to survive tomorrow.
So, what’s the alternative?
I believe we need a hybrid model of negotiation. A third path. One that combines the strengths of both approaches and adds a layer of strategic realism suited to today’s economic environment.
This new approach would look like this:
Clarity of Goals: Know exactly what you must win. Not everything, but the few key elements you can’t compromise on.
Empathy with Edges: Understand the other party’s motivations and pressures but don’t be afraid to assert your own with strength.
Value Framing: Position your ask not as a demand, but as a survival need, and tie it to how the relationship can thrive longer-term.
Clearly define the levers you are willing to use to reach a goal.
In short, it’s not about winning at all costs, nor is it about fairness for its own sake. It’s about negotiating in a way that lets you win more, while still being invited back.
What Do You Think?
I’m curious, as someone navigating this new world of shrinking margins, competitive pressure, and shifting loyalties, how are you negotiating today?
Let’s open the conversation. Because in this new era, how we negotiate might not just shape our deals — it may determine who survives