Interest-Based Bargaining Service

What is Interest-Based Bargaining?

Interest-based bargaining (IBB) is method of negotiating a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) different from the widely used “traditional” bargaining model. In traditional bargaining, the parties exchange proposals for changes in the current contract (or for the provisions of a first contract) and the parties discuss those proposals, perhaps accepting some elements, rejecting others and trying to reach agreement. IBB has no trading of proposals.  In IBB any given proposal is considered one of many options to solve a perceived problem. While traditional negotiations are inherently adversarial in nature, IBB converts negotiating into an effective group problem solving exercise.  This approach was described in the seminal book "Getting to Yes" by professors Fisher and Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Project in the early 1980s. 

What Makes IBB Effective?

With its origins in the Harvard Negotiation Project in the 1980s, IBB is sometimes called “principled,” “win-win,” or “mutual gains” bargaining.  IBB emphasizes identifying and addressing the underlying interests of all parties involved prior to generating multiple options to effectively address the issue being negotiated. Options are then evaluated by objective, mutually-agreed-upon criteria and agreement is achieved using consensus, not voting or dictating of a solution using bargaining power. By focusing on interests—especially interests that are common to both parties—instead of positions (proposals), the group dynamic among the negotiators is radically changed from adversarial to cooperative. The goal is to settle any given issue by satisfying as many of the parties’ interests as possible. Hence the nickname “win-win.”

Benefits of IBB

IBB works because it expands the realm of possibilities available for a solution to any given issue. Parties seek to help each other get their fundamental interests (such as business success, security, economic well-being, a sense of belonging, recognition, and control over one's life) met. Thinking creatively to generate multiple options for problem/issues helps “expand the pie,”instead of working from the limited potential of initial starting positions. Moreover, converting an adversarial process into a successful collaborative problem-solving exercise can significantly improve the working relationship between the parties yielding a potentially easier time in future contract administration. 

Limitations of IBB

Most neutrals would agree that IBB is not feasible in all collective bargaining situations. Experience dictates that IBB is most likely to succeed where the existing working relationships among the negotiators are reasonably decent. That is always judgement call. There needs to be at least a hint of trust between managers and union leaders to justify the length of time and expense of IBB.  Despite the perceptions of some, given the time devoted in traditional bargaining to posturing and arguing over unrealistic positions, the amount of time taken up by IBB is usually no more than in typical traditional/adversarial negotiations.

Key Success Factors

Like facilitative mediation, some mediators have used IBB without training of the parties in the tools and techniques involved in IBB.  However, most working neutrals would agree that one to three days of joint training for the bargaining teams is necessary to teach new skills as well as to help the team refrain from reverting to traditional adversarial mindsets and behaviors that could easily derail the IBB. Expert neutral facilitation is also needed to ensure success because adherence to the usually unfamiliar procedure throughout is critical.  Importantly, and sometimes overlooked by eager participants, is the need to educate constituents, both union members and upper-level managers, who may not be in the negotiating room, about IBB to avoid the false perception that the new method--which involves collaboration--involves their representatives somehow being co-opted into accepting outcomes that are not in their constituents’ best interests. IBB involves change and change is usually not easy.

By providing expert IBB training and facilitation Tom Kruglinski has helped many union and management groups successfully conduct IBB that resulted in landmark contracts and creative solutions that otherwise would not have been achievable using the traditional bargaining (i.e., positional) methods. Contact Kruglinski ADR if you have questions or for more information on IBB.