Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Faculty & Research
  • Faculty
  • Research
  • Featured Topics
  • Academic Units
  • …→
  • Harvard Business School→
  • Faculty & Research→
Publications
Publications
  • April 2017
  • Article
  • Negotiation Journal

BATNAs in Negotiation: Common Errors and Three Kinds of 'No'

By: James K. Sebenius
  • Format:Print
  • | Pages:12
ShareBar

Abstract

The Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (“BATNA”) concept in negotiation has proven to be immensely useful. In tandem with its value in practice, BATNA has become a wildly successful acronym (with more than 14 million Google results). But the initial characterization of this concept in Getting to Yes (Fisher, Ury, and Patton 1991) as well as many later interpretations can be problematic, limiting, and even misleading in several ways, which this article analyzes and illustrates. First, early characterizations could be easily read to imply that one’s BATNA could not itself be a negotiated agreement. Second, and more seriously, common descriptions of one’s BATNA as the “best outside option, independent of the other side” needlessly limit its applicability, especially in the many bargaining relationships in which BATNAs are inherently interdependent. Third, BATNAs are often mistakenly described mainly as “last resorts” relevant only in case of impasse or “if the other side is more powerful.” Other uses of the term “BATNA” such as the common question, “How do I negotiate if I have no BATNA?” reflect misconceptions. Although savvy negotiators and analysts generally avoid these pitfalls, the less sophisticated can go astray. This article offers robust correctives to these misimpressions and relates these to three different kinds of “no” in negotiation: a “tactical no,” a “reset no” that permits away-from-the-table moves to favorably alter the underlying setup, and a “final no.”

Keywords

Agreements and Arrangements; Negotiation Tactics

Citation

Sebenius, James K. "BATNAs in Negotiation: Common Errors and Three Kinds of 'No'." Negotiation Journal 33, no. 2 (April 2017): 89–99.
  • Find it at Harvard
  • Read Now

About The Author

James K. Sebenius

Negotiation, Organizations & Markets
→More Publications

More from the Author

    • January–February 2023
    • Foreign Affairs

    Russia and Ukraine Are Not Ready for Talks: But They Might Get There If Ukraine Keeps Winning

    By: James K. Sebenius and Michael Singh
    • November 2021
    • Faculty Research

    Steve Schwarzman on Dealmaking II: When They Hold All the Cards (B)

    By: James K. Sebenius and Alex Green
    • November 2021
    • Faculty Research

    Steve Schwarzman on Dealmaking II: When They Hold All the Cards (A)

    By: James K. Sebenius and Alex Green
More from the Author
  • Russia and Ukraine Are Not Ready for Talks: But They Might Get There If Ukraine Keeps Winning By: James K. Sebenius and Michael Singh
  • Steve Schwarzman on Dealmaking II: When They Hold All the Cards (B) By: James K. Sebenius and Alex Green
  • Steve Schwarzman on Dealmaking II: When They Hold All the Cards (A) By: James K. Sebenius and Alex Green
ǁ
Campus Map
Harvard Business School
Soldiers Field
Boston, MA 02163
→Map & Directions
→More Contact Information
  • Make a Gift
  • Site Map
  • Jobs
  • Harvard University
  • Trademarks
  • Policies
  • Accessibility
  • Digital Accessibility
Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College