Misunderstandings, to which attention is drawn to major textbooks is not the purpose of negotiations. Contrary to popular the objective of the negotiations is to reach an agreement. Sensible objective of the negotiations is rather to achieve the best possible result that is possible to reach an agreement, but that which gives more than we can achieve without negotiations.  Contrary to current practice in the negotiations is not enough knowledge of your preferences, you must also take into account the preferences of other parties. This means that making the offer is not enough to determine how good it is for us, but also should be evaluated (sometimes guess) as it is attractive to the other side.

Mixing self-interest of justice becomes a cause in the negotiations. We must add that sometimes does not reach an agreement not because there is no common area of the market, but because its participants are not aware. This often involves the so-called. curvature selfish (self-serving bias). It manifests itself, inter alia, in the fact that we are inclined to overestimate their contributions and capabilities. Research shows that almost all men to examine their different capabilities than the average. ? We are above average? in running the car in productivity, even in health. There are some instructive experiment. But married couples asked for a contribution of each spouse in a variety of household responsibilities - such as preparing breakfast, making the  beds, washing dishes, etc. Each of them stating whether the operation is mainly performed by the husband or the wife. When I added the contributions from both sides, it became apparent that a whole far exceeds 100%. Clearly ascribed to the Upside spouses share household responsibilities. Ago was accompanied by a greater ease remind the examples of activities for the benefit of their own home than the examples of the spouse. Various guides on the conduct of negotiations stress that an important and even necessary thing in the successful negotiation is to establish credibility and trust partners. Of course, trust can help. In particular, the confidence that the arrangements will be met. But this issue and the parties seek to gain security, so as not to rely on the same trust. The more so that even a partner worthy of trust can be weaknesses. This "innocent" and the listing may lead some participants to carry out serious loss. It is a kind of trap. It is easy to notice the two participants in exceed the rate of one dollar. This is the point where the commitment to auction is manifestly unreasonable. But the reluctance on the part of involved participants to accept a smaller loss leads to an ever greater zoom losses. (For example, a participant who has already offered 95 cents and was pierced by one partner to the dollar dilemma is: When you resign from the auction loses 95 cents, set when the dollar and five cents may lose less - only five cents. Decides, therefore, to continue bidding! But his opponent is in exactly the same situation, so to continue and finish the game may be a serious loss of both). There is no doubt always a good idea to check whether the situation in which to engage does not contain a trap, which may lead to the ruin of both parties.