Negotiations of the future “Is non-agreement better that a bad deal?”


Some negotiations are so complex and difficult that it has become impossible to find a solution. In our global advisory practice, we have noticed that “non-agreement” has become a new standard.

Increasing complexity is a trend we cannot change. International contracts that have to respect a multitude of different compliance requirements often result in convoluted legal clauses. In the future, highly complex negotiations may therefore often end without an agreement - “disagreement” will become the new standard. For your preparation, this means that you need to prepare your internal stakeholders for the possibility that there might not be an agreement.


“Disagreement” will soon become the new standard. Think about the moment when the cost of continuing the dispute outweighs the benefits. When that moment has come, it is a good idea to enter a “disagreement” and continue to collaborate without accusations or hard feelings.

Every negotiation needs a maximum objective which you work towards, as well as a minimum objective. If you cannot achieve the minimum, breaking off negotiations with a non-agreement is better than an agreement. The bigger the range between maximum and minimum objectives, the more likely you will find an agreement.

Club Events by Schranner Negotiation Institute

Designed for community members exclusively
Read more

"Leading High-Stake Negotiations" Negotiation Conference 2024

Revealing the topic of the Negotiation Conference 2024
Read more


Enjoy the recap of the N-Conference 2023
Read more