Negotiation

DEAR MAN is a formal DBT interpersonal-effectiveness skill used when you are trying to obtain an objective, make a request, or say no effectively.

The final part, Negotiate, becomes especially useful when your original proposal is not working.

You may:

• Offer another solution
• Ask the other person for alternatives
• Reduce or modify part of your request
• Maintain an important no while offering something else
• Look for another way to solve the underlying problem

Suppose someone asks you to work Sunday, and Sunday is not available.

Negotiation does not require:

“Fine. I'll work Sunday.”

You might instead say:

“I still can't work Sunday. I could cover Saturday evening or take an extra shift Tuesday.”

The limit stays.

The solution becomes flexible.

During conflict, it is easy for:

“We have a scheduling problem”

to turn into:

“You are the problem.”

Return to the specific issue.

For example:

“We both need the car Tuesday evening. Let's figure out how we handle that.”

Statements such as:

“You're impossible.”

or:

“You're selfish.”

give you very little to negotiate.

Instead, identify:

• The decision
• The request
• The schedule
• The responsibility
• The specific behavior

that needs to be addressed.

For example:

“We have to leave by seven.”

That is a position.

It tells you what the person currently wants to happen.

Maybe the reason is:

“I have an early morning and need enough sleep.”

Once you know that, more possibilities may appear.

Perhaps:

• They leave earlier while you stay
• You take separate transportation
• The activity starts earlier
• You choose a different day

Negotiating only the positions can make a conflict seem more rigid than it really is.

Useful questions include:

“What part of this is most important to you?”

“What problem would that solve?”

“What are you most concerned will happen otherwise?”

Ask with genuine curiosity, not as a courtroom challenge.

Before making concessions, ask:

• What do I actually need?
• What would I prefer?
• What am I trying to prevent?
• What responsibility do I have?
• What am I unwilling to agree to?

If you do not know what matters to you, it is easy to agree just to end the discomfort.

You might:

prefer Saturday

but:

genuinely be unavailable Monday.

Negotiation becomes easier when you know which parts have room to move.

Firm items might include:

• A safety requirement
• A consent issue
• A legal requirement
• A genuine scheduling impossibility
• An important personal boundary

Example:

“I'm not willing to drive after drinking.”

That is not something that needs to be split down the middle.

Flexible parts might include:

• Timing
• Location
• Who handles which task
• How often something happens
• The exact method used

For example:

“I need the bill paid by Friday, but I don't care which of us submits the payment.”

Try making three categories:

Firm — I am not willing to give this up.

Flexible — I have a preference, but I can move.

Open — I do not have a strong preference.

This can reduce impulsive concessions during a stressful conversation.

Try:

“What is the most important part of this for you?”

Or:

“What would a workable solution need to include from your perspective?”

For example:

“So you don't necessarily need me there all day. You mainly need help during the morning.”

A more accurate understanding can reveal options that neither person initially noticed.

You can say:

“I understand why that schedule works best for you. It still doesn't work for me.”

Then continue looking at alternatives.

Conflict often begins as:

“My solution versus your solution.”

Ask:

“What other ways could we solve the underlying problem?”

Try:

“I can't do Tuesday. I could do Wednesday or Thursday. Would either work?”

Or:

“I can't pay the entire amount this week. I could pay half Friday and the rest next Friday.”

You do not have to solve everything yourself.

Try:

“I can't agree to the current plan, and I know this matters to you. What other options do you see?”

Their idea may be something you had not considered.

Suppose you care strongly about:

having Saturday morning free

but only mildly prefer:

doing the task Friday rather than Sunday.

You may decide to give on the day in order to protect the Saturday morning that matters more.

Before agreeing, ask:

“Am I choosing to be flexible here, or am I giving in because I cannot tolerate the disagreement?”

Intentional flexibility is different from automatically abandoning your position.

If one person says:

“Let's spend $100.”

and another says:

“Let's spend $1,000.”

choosing $550 is not automatically a good solution.

Ask:

• What are we buying?
• What can we afford?
• Why does each amount matter?
• What alternatives exist?

A useful agreement solves the important parts of the problem well enough.

It does not need to divide every difference exactly in half.

Avoid saying:

“Fine.”

when you already know you will not follow through.

It may be better to say:

“I don't think I can agree to that. Let's keep looking.”

Agreement reached through:

• Threats
• Intimidation
• Coercion
• Relentless pressure

is not healthy collaborative negotiation.

The goal is not to wear the other person down until they surrender.

Compare:

“We'll communicate better.”

with:

“If either of us is going to be more than thirty minutes late, we'll send a text.”

The second agreement is easier to understand and carry out.

Before finishing, make sure you both know:

• Who is responsible
• What each person will do
• When it will happen
• Whether the plan needs to be revisited

Try:

“So I'll handle Monday and Wednesday, you'll handle Tuesday and Thursday, and we'll decide Friday based on our schedules. Is that what you understood too?”

This can catch misunderstandings before they become the next conflict.

For complicated practical arrangements, it may help to:

• Text the plan
• Put it on a shared calendar
• Write down responsibilities

The purpose is clarity, not creating evidence against the other person.

If neither person knows which arrangement will work, try:

“Let's try this for two weeks and then check in.”

A trial can turn:

“Which solution will definitely work forever?”

into:

“What is reasonable to test next?”

Decide:

• How long to try it
• What would show that it is working
• When you will talk again

Then revise based on what actually happens.

You do not need to bargain over:

• Whether you consent to sexual activity
• Whether you tolerate violence
• Whether you ride with an impaired driver
• Whether someone gets access to private information you do not consent to share

Negotiation is useful when there is legitimate room for alternatives.

A firm boundary may still leave other details flexible.

For example:

“I'm not willing to drive after drinking. We can use a rideshare, call someone, or leave the car here.”

The safety boundary stays firm.

The transportation solution is negotiable.

Suppose your boundary is:

“I need one evening each week with no plans.”

You might negotiate:

• Which evening
• How emergencies are handled
• How plans are scheduled around it

without abandoning the need for downtime.

If your internal process is:

“I'll agree to anything if this conversation stops,”

consider pausing.

You may need time to decide what you actually want to offer.

Someone asks:

“Can you help me move all day Saturday?”

You cannot.

You might say:

“I can't help all day, but I could come from nine until noon.”

Your no to the original request remains intact.

Sometimes:

“No, I'm not able to do that.”

is enough.

Negotiation is an option when you genuinely have something else you are willing to offer.

You might say:

“Could you cover my shift Friday? Or maybe just half of it. Or actually don't worry about it.”

before the person has answered anything.

Make the clear request first.

Then listen.

Negotiate if negotiation is actually needed.

When very angry or afraid, it may feel like there are only two possibilities:

“I win”

or:

“I lose.”

If possible, reduce the emotional intensity enough to ask:

“What options am I not seeing yet?”

You might say:

“I don't think we're going to solve this while we're this upset. Let's come back to it after dinner.”

A pause is different from abandoning the issue indefinitely.

You might say:

“I understand why you want an answer today. The uncertainty is making planning difficult for you.”

Then:

“I still need until tomorrow before I can decide.”

Validation does not require changing your position.

Two people may not contribute exactly:

fifty-fifty

to every task.

Instead ask:

• What responsibilities exist?
• What capacity does each person have?
• What does each person contribute overall?
• Does the arrangement feel workable and reasonably fair?

Two people may both say:

“I just want this to be fair.”

while imagining completely different arrangements.

Ask each other:

“What would fair look like to you, and why?”

An argument about:

who takes out the trash

may actually involve:

how household responsibilities are divided overall.

If you keep negotiating each isolated incident, the larger issue may remain unresolved.

Try:

“I think we keep arguing about individual chores, but the bigger issue is that neither of us thinks the workload is divided fairly. Can we talk about the whole system?”

For example:

“I understand that both projects need to be completed. I don't have enough time to finish both today. Which one should take priority?”

You are not claiming the work can simply disappear.

You are negotiating priorities within a real constraint.

A negotiation with:

• A partner
• A coworker
• A supervisor
• An instructor

may involve very different levels of power and decision-making authority.

Be realistic about:

• What you can request
• What the other person has authority to decide
• Policies or requirements
• Possible consequences

One person may want:

more time together

while another wants:

more time alone.

Negotiation asks whether the relationship can make reasonable room for both.

The difference itself does not establish who is right.

Healthy negotiation does not necessarily mean:

“I gave up exactly three things, so you owe me three.”

Consider the larger pattern of:

• Mutual consideration
• Flexibility
• Responsibility
• Fairness over time

Sometimes both people understand each other clearly and still have needs that do not fit together.

The outcome may be:

• No agreement
• A decision by whoever has legitimate responsibility for the decision
• Accepting the disagreement
• Changing the arrangement
• Ending a commitment or relationship

Failure to reach agreement does not automatically mean the negotiation was done badly.

Ask:

“Can I realistically live with this agreement?”

If the answer is no, continuing the discussion or accepting that no agreement exists may be more honest.

If someone uses:

• Violence
• Threats
• Intimidation
• Blackmail
• Coercive control

to force agreement, the problem is not that you need better negotiation skills.

Safety may need to take priority.

In unsafe situations, useful actions may involve:

• Leaving
• Seeking help
• Reducing contact
• Using workplace or institutional processes
• Contacting emergency assistance when needed

A collaborative conversation is not always the appropriate tool.

For example:

“I can't make the original meeting time. I can do Tuesday at three or Wednesday after five. Let me know if either works.”

A written message can make alternatives easier to compare.

If messages become:

• Increasingly long
• Easy to misinterpret
• Rapidly escalating
• Focused on defending wording rather than solving the issue

you might say:

“I think we're making this harder over text. Can we talk about it later tonight?”

Before a negotiation, divide the issue into:

Firm:
What am I not willing or able to change?

Flexible:
What matters, but could change?

Open:
What do I have little preference about?

Use this to decide where you genuinely have room to negotiate.

Write your current position:

“I want ______.”

Then ask:

“Why is that important to me?”

Repeat until you understand the underlying need or concern.

Do the same for the other person's position using what they have actually told you.

When stuck between:

Option A

and:

Option B,

deliberately generate at least three additional possibilities.

Do not judge them immediately.

Then evaluate which options actually address the important needs.

Start with something you cannot agree to:

“I can't ______.”

Then ask:

“What can I genuinely offer instead?”

Example:

“I can't lend you $500. I can help you look at other options tonight.”

When your proposal has been rejected, try:

“That option doesn't work for you, and the original request doesn't work for me. What else could we try?”

The goal is to make solution-finding a shared task.

Take a vague agreement:

“We'll both help more.”

Rewrite it so that each person knows:

• What they will do
• When
• How often

Example:

“I'll cook Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. You'll cook Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. Sunday we'll decide together.”

If you are uncertain about a solution, make it temporary.

Complete:

“Let's try ______ until ______, then check whether ______.”

Example:

“Let's try alternating school pickup for the next two weeks, then see whether the schedule is working.”

If both people are arguing about fairness, each person answers:

“What would a fair arrangement look like to me, and why?”

Compare the answers.

Look for:

• Shared assumptions
• Different assumptions
• Different information
• Different priorities

Before a difficult conversation, practice:

“What I really need is ______. I'm flexible about ______. One option I could offer is ______.”

This can make it easier to stay flexible without losing your main point.

After a negotiation, ask:

1. Did I understand what mattered to the other person?
2. Did I communicate what mattered to me?
3. Did I know what was firm and flexible?
4. Did we consider more than one option?
5. Did I agree to something I can actually do?
6. Is the final agreement clear?

Use the answers to improve the next conversation.

Negotiation does not require giving away the thing that matters most.

Ask:

“What matters most, and where do I actually have flexibility?”

Strategic flexibility can help you protect what matters more.

People can have different ideas about fairness.

Explain:

• What arrangement you think is fair
• Why
• What information you are considering

Then ask how the other person sees it.

Before agreeing, try:

“I need a minute to think about that.”

Return to your:

Firm / Flexible / Open

categories.

You can ask directly:

“My option doesn't work for you. What would you propose instead?”

If the only acceptable outcome to the other person is:

“Do exactly what I want,”

there may not currently be much room for collaborative negotiation.

Some problems do not have a good solution.

Negotiation may involve choosing:

the most workable of several imperfect options.

Evaluate the tradeoffs honestly.

Stop repeating the same positions.

Ask:

• What does each of us actually need?
• What larger issue keeps producing this conflict?
• Have we considered alternatives?
• Is one of us treating something flexible as non-negotiable?

Make the agreement more concrete.

Clarify:

• Who
• Does what
• When
• How often

Then revisit whether the agreement itself was realistic.

You may not have to.

Ask:

“Is this actually a firm limit for me?”

If yes, communicate the limit rather than pretending it is open to negotiation.

Pause and clarify:

“I thought we were trying to solve ______. Has the problem changed?”

If new issues need to be discussed, consider handling them separately rather than endlessly expanding the current negotiation.

Use regulation first when possible.

Consider:

• Pause Before Reacting
• Time-Out
• STOP → Redirect
• TIPP
• Breathing
• Wise Mind

Return to negotiation when you can think more flexibly.

A compromise often involves each person giving up part of what they originally wanted.

For example:

“You wanted to leave at six, I wanted eight, so we'll leave at seven.”

Negotiation can also produce a different solution entirely.

Maybe:

“You'll leave at six because you need sleep, and I'll get a ride home later.”

Nobody simply split the difference.

The underlying needs were solved another way.

For example:

“I can't work Sunday.”

For example:

“I could cover Saturday, switch Tuesday, or come in early Monday.”

Boundaries tell you where flexibility stops.

Negotiation uses the flexibility that remains.

You can identify a problem, generate options, and choose a solution on your own when the decision is yours.

The solution affects more than one person, and each person has a position, preference, need, or limit that matters.

Negotiation is therefore interpersonal problem solving.

For example:

“I can't work both Saturday and Sunday.”

For example:

“Could I work Saturday while someone else covers Sunday?”

Clear assertiveness often comes first.

Negotiation follows when the two positions do not immediately match.

It helps you:

• Describe the situation
• Express your thoughts or feelings
• Assert your request or refusal
• Explain useful consequences
• Stay focused
• Present yourself effectively
• Negotiate when needed

This page focuses on what happens when:

your original request and the other person's response do not line up.

The full DEAR MAN skill puts Negotiation into a larger interpersonal strategy.

You compare:

• Advantages
• Disadvantages
• Short-term effects
• Long-term effects

to help decide what option makes sense.

Cost-Benefit Analysis may help you decide what you are willing to offer.

Negotiation is the conversation in which the people involved work toward the agreement.