This really helped, but I`d be happy if you could help me with a full document on zopa (possible or potential agreement area). Thank you very much. In addition to understanding ZOPA and negative ZOPA during a negotiation, you should also consider your best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) before any discussion. BATNA is the modus operandi that a party will adopt in the event of no agreement during a negotiation. In other words, a party`s BATNA is what it wants to build on if a negotiation fails. The Concept Zone of a Possible Agreement (ZOPA), also known as the Zone of Potential Agreement  or bargaining margin, describes the range of options available to two parties in the sale and negotiations when the respective minimum objectives of the parties overlap. In the absence of such an overlap, i.e. in the absence of a possibility of rational agreement, the opposite concept of noPA (no possible agreement) applies. Where there is a ZOPA, an agreement within the area is reasonable for both parties. Outside the zone, no trading volume should result in an agreement.
On the other hand, inclusive negotiations are designed to create values or “increase the cake.” This is possible when the parties have common interests or deal with several issues. In this case, the parties can combine their interests and negotiate between several topics in order to create a common value. In this way, both parties can “win,” even if neither side receives everything they originally thought possible. If, in the example above, the rewriting of the job description could create additional employment, distribution negotiation would become an inclusive negotiation between the employer and the two potential workers. If both candidates are qualified, they can now get both jobs. ZoPA exists in this case when two jobs are created and each candidate prefers one of the two. The parties do not share their negotiating room. Skill is required to examine the range of potential positive outcomes in a negotiation.
Some agreements should not be made, but sometimes good deals die because the negotiators did not think. I do not like payment lines in negotiations. I use resistance points instead. The result of abandoning payment lines is that if you find other sources of value during trading, you can consider them without giving up your payment line. When both parties know their BATNAs and leave their positions, the parties should be able to communicate, evaluate the proposed agreements and, finally, identify the ZOPA. However, parties often do not know their own BATNA and even less know the BATNA on the other side. Often, the parties can pretend to have a better alternative than they really do, because the right alternatives usually lead to more power in negotiations. This is explained in more detail in the BATN trial. However, the result of such deception could be the obvious absence of ZOPA – and therefore a failure of negotiation when there was actually a ZOPA. Common uncertainties may also affect the parties` ability to assess potential agreements, as the parties may be unrealistic or pessimistic about the possibility of reaching an agreement or the value of other options.  Do you want to deepen your understanding of the dynamics of the negotiations? Discover our eight-week online Negotiation Mastery course and learn how to develop the skills and techniques needed to close deals and enter into effective agreements. As the master`s course in negotiation has shown, interaction in a negotiation is to shape the perception of ZOPA through conviction and other tactical measures, as this will lead to an agreement.