In 1981, the book Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and William Ury, popularized the concept of principled negotiation. Principled negotiation requires that the parties involved develop a level of mutual trust, understanding and agree to cooperative principled negotiation. Only with mutual trust are negotiating parties willing to share information and forgo distributive bargaining tactics. 

Two of the defining aspects of principled negotiation focus on interests rather than positions and inventing options for mutual gain. Perhaps the major point of principled negotiation is understanding and addressing the interests parties hold that led them to the positions they take during negotiation. Fisher and Ury contend that parties should discuss their interests without debate over validity to arrive at options that satisfy their respective interests. Parties must be willing to share relevant information critical for effective solutions.

Many mediators encourage participants in mediation to utilize the principles of interest-based bargaining.

Justine Kirby writing in the Otago Law Review argued that principled negotiation simply does not recognize the Negotiator’s Dilemma, that is, principled negotiation promotes being more open, co-operative and seeking to meet the other parties’ needs. All behavioral characteristics more likely to be found in women who are then disadvantaged by “adherence to principled negotiation’s one-sided approach, which ignores the reality the hard decisions that must be made during negotiations.” 

Conflict scholars have long acknowledged that relationships involve both conflict and harmony. Some negotiation scholars also acknowledge that negotiation involves both cooperation and competition. For anyone to adhere rigidly to principled negotiation, they will be at a disadvantage with another party who acts both cooperatively and competitively. Negotiation during mediation realistically involves aspects of both cooperation and competition. Being skilled in both is more likely to benefit any participant.

The group Everytown for Gun Safety issued a report that more than 500 people had been injured or killed in road rage shootings last year.

 Road rage includes much more than shootings. According to the American Automobile Association Foundation for Traffic Safety’s 2019 data, nearly 80% of drivers expressed significant aggression or road rage at least once in a thirty-day period. Road rage actions include purposely tailgating, yelling at another driver, honking to show anger, making an angry gesture, blocking another vehicle from changing lanes, cutting off another vehicle on purpose, getting out of the vehicle to confront another driver, and bumping or ramming another vehicle on purpose.

 Those of us who study conflict point out that road rage, or sky rage and sideline rage for that matter, is not the same as other forms of conflict, as these result from one party’s need to release tension. The actor has no relationship with the receiving party who could be any other person. The action is an end in itself, a response to frustrations in which the receiving party is simply unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The receiving party could easily be any other person as there is no relationship between the parties. That’s why road rage is referred to as non-realistic conflict.

 Usually non-realistic conflicts cannot be dealt with negotiation or mediation. The AAA guidelines for dealing with road rage take this into account:

•      Be tolerant and forgiving – remember it is not personal against you, the offender could just be having a really bad day.

•      Avoid eye contact with the angry driver and avoid making any gestures.

•      Don’t respond to aggression with aggression risking escalation.

•    Stay as calm and courteous as possible.

•    If the rage escalates, lock your vehicle, use your horn to attract attention, and call 911.

 The bottom line is that responding with aggression can easily lead to an unpleasant and dangerous incident that can likely be avoided if cooler heads prevail.