In most people`s minds, invention is simply not part of the negotiation process. People see their job as narrowing the gap between positions and not expanding available opportunities. They tend to say, “We have enough trouble agreeing as they are. The last thing we need is a lot of different ideas. Given that the final outcome of the negotiations is a single decision, they are concerned that the outstanding discussion will only delay and confuse the process. An option such as a demilitarized Sinai can often make the difference between deadlock and agreements. A lawyer we know leads his success directly to his ability to invent solutions that are beneficial to both his client and the other side. He stretch the cake before sharing it. The ability to invent options is one of the most useful benefits a negotiator can have. Members of the Harvard Negotiation Project, Fisher and Ury focused on the psychology of negotiation in their “negotiations in principle” method, and found acceptable solutions in determining what needs and needs are flexible for negotiators.  In 1987, the book was adopted in several U.S. school districts to help students understand “non-contradictory negotiations.”  In 1991, the book was published in a second issue with Bruce Patton, a publisher of the first edition, who was co-author. The book has become a perpetual bestseller.
In July 1998, he was on the Business Week “Best-Seller” book list for more than three years.  In December 2007, he was still on the Longest Running Best Sellers list in paperbacks.  The third edition was published in 2011.  The case between Israel and Egypt negotiating who should keep how much of the Sinai Peninsula reveals both a major negotiating problem and an important opportunity. The cake that leaves both parts happy. Often, you negotiate along a single dimension, such as the height of the territory, the price of a car, the length of a lease for an apartment or the size of a commission for a sale. At other times, you are faced with one that seems to be a clearly favorable choice, either for you or for the other party. Who will have the house in a divorce plan? Who will have custody of the children? You can see the choice as one between winning and losing – and no side will agree to lose. Even if you win and you get the car for $12,000, the five-year lease or the house and the kids, you feel like they won`t make you forget.
Whatever the situation, your choice seems limited. Since its original publication in 1981, Getting to Yes has been translated into 18 languages and has sold more than one million copies in various editions. This completely revamped edition is a universal guide to the art of negotiating personal and professional disputes. It offers a concise strategy to move from all conflicts to mutually acceptable agreements. On the other side. Suppose you negotiate your salary with your boss for the coming year. You asked for a $4,000 increase; Your boss offered you $1,500, a figure you gave is not satisfactory. In a tense situation like this, you probably won`t start inventing imaginative solutions. You may fear that if you suggest a half-baked idea clear as half the increase in an increase and half in additional benefits, you might look stupid. Your boss might say, “Be serious. You know better than you do.
This would disrupt company policy. I`m surprised. you even proposed it. If you are inventing an opportunity to spread the increase over time, he can accept it as an offer: “I am ready to negotiate on that basis. Since he can take everything you say as a commitment, you will think twice before saying anything.