David A. Lax

James K. Sebenius

<article-ideainbrief class="article-ideainbrief">
 <h4 class="ideainbrief-title">Idea in Brief</h4>
 <div class="ideainbrief-contents">
  <p>Direct negotiation “at the table” often makes sense. But for complex deals, which are usually built on a series of smaller ones involving multiple parties, a more strategic approach is to focus on what unfolds away from the table: the process of sequencing individual deals in a way that achieves the target outcome with enough support to make it stick.</p>
  <p>A “negotiation campaign,” which may take months or even years, involves identifying the relevant parties and grouping them into fronts; determining if the fronts can be combined; figuring out the order in which you will engage the fronts; and assessing how much information to share among the parties—and with your opponents.</p>
  <p>When Boeing set out to sell $11 billion worth of aircraft to Air India, in late 2005, the company did significant advance work to build support for the deal on many fronts: its internal departments; banks, export agencies, and aircraft leasing companies; and the Indian government, which holds an ownership stake in the airline.</p>
 </div>
</article-ideainbrief><p>Most big deals are built on a series of smaller ones. That’s true of megamergers, major sales, infrastructure projects, and even some UN resolutions. These deals are the culmination of many focused negotiations among various parties, each with its own concerns. Most deal-making advice addresses how to choose the right tactics for each piece of the puzzle. Absent from the literature is guidance on how best to put the pieces together, let alone how to identify them in the first place. This leaves a glaring gap.</p>

D630vxIvLmKwA5KnK0Xt2zD96NzYzF/k0oeqq2s1kNnzp0CUx2+ZyuK4Bu0ZmXuJkBIIcf1CQ31kxLSKSQFqNMvfzKNJwtxlY1N9xSgGJUKk1vlG9Qm0zSOZ9UIC0AKjJcqVJIyPhFzUhMNiDudSGQ==

<p><span class="reprint">Reprint: R1211G</span> </p>
<p>Most big deals&#8212;megamergers, major sales, infrastructure projects&#8212;are built on a series of smaller ones. Each component deal presents a tactical challenge, but sequencing the parts in a way that achieves the target outcome is a strategic challenge that can unfold over months or years. This process, which the authors call a <em>negotiation campaign,</em> must generally be conducted on several fronts, each involving multiple parties. </p>
<p>A multifront campaign can be much more effective than direct negotiation. After failed talks between longshoremen and the Pacific Maritime Association&#8212;a group of shippers and port operators&#8212;the PMA&#8217;s president turned away from the bargaining table and embarked on a campaign to align member&#8211;firms, the business community, the U.S. government, and the public around his target outcome: the deployment of new information technologies to help unclog busy ports. The result was an agreement that was ultimately mutually beneficial. </p>
<p>Designing and executing a negotiation campaign involves identifying the relevant parties, grouping them into fronts according to shared interests, determining whether to combine fronts (if, for instance, doing so would unite your allies), and deciding which fronts to approach early on and which to engage only after you&#8217;ve made progress elsewhere. </p>
<p>The deal between the PMA and the longshoremen involved high stakes, but many small-scale deals&#8212;such as gaining approval for a new product&#8212;also play out on multiple fronts. Going straight to a key decision maker often makes sense, but in many cases a multifront campaign is the only way.</p>

Deal Making 2.0: A Guide to Complex Negotiations

Reprint: R1211G Most big deals—megamergers, major sales, infrastructure projects—are built on a series of smaller ones. Each component deal presents a tactical challenge, but sequencing the parts in a way that achieves the target outcome is a strategic challenge that can unfold over months or years. This process, which the authors call a negotiation campaign, must generally be conducted on several fronts, each involving multiple parties. A multifront campaign can be much more effective than direct negotiation. After failed talks between longshoremen and the Pacific Maritime Association—a group of shippers and port operators—the PMA’s president turned away from the bargaining table and embarked on a campaign to align member–firms, the business community, the U.S. government, and the public around his target outcome: the deployment of new information technologies to help unclog busy ports. The result was an agreement that was ultimately mutually beneficial. Designing and executing a negotiation campaign involves identifying the relevant parties, grouping them into fronts according to shared interests, determining whether to combine fronts (if, for instance, doing so would unite your allies), and deciding which fronts to approach early on and which to engage only after you’ve made progress elsewhere. The deal between the PMA and the longshoremen involved high stakes, but many small-scale deals—such as gaining approval for a new product—also play out on multiple fronts. Going straight to a key decision maker often makes sense, but in many cases a multifront campaign is the only way.

Deal Making 2.0: A Guide to Complex Negotiations

Summary.

Partner Center