The Law Society of Upper Canada “Short Glossary of Dispute Resolution Terms” (Toronto: 1992) at 6.
Return to footnote 1 referrer
S.G. Goldberg; E.A. Frank; N.H. Rogers; Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation, and Other Processes, (2nd ed.) (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1992) at 3.
Return to footnote 2 referrer
Fisher, Patton & Ury, Getting to Yes, 3-11.
Return to footnote 3 referrer
Murray, at 184-185.
Fisher, Patton & Ury, at 5-7.
Return to footnote 4 referrer
Murray, at 180-181.
Boskey, supra, note 2 at 10.
Return to footnote 5 referrer
Ibid.
Return to footnote 6 referrer
Fisher, Patton & Ury, supra, note 1 at xviii-xix.
Goldberg, Frank & Rogers, supra, note 6 at 37.
Return to footnote 7 referrer
Fisher, Patton & Ury, Ibid.
Return to footnote 8 referrer
Janos Nyerges, “Ten Commandments for a Negotiator”, (1987) 3 Negotiation Journal 21.
Roger Fisher, a noted authority in negotiation states:
It is no doubt possible that in a given case a lawyer may obtain a short-term gain for a client by bluffing, threatening, actively misrepresenting the extent of the lawyer's authority, what the client is willing to do, or other facts, or by engaging in browbeating or other psychological pressure tactics. Yet many lawyers and academic experts believe that a practice of trying to settle differences by such tactics is risky for clients, bad for lawyers and bad for society.
I believe that it is not a sound practice to negotiate in a way that rewards deception, stubbornness, dirty tricks, and taking risks. I think it wiser for our clients, ourselves and our society to deal with differences in a way that optimizes the chance of reaching a fair outcome efficiently and amicably; that rewards those who are better prepared, more skilful and efficient, and who have the better case as measured by objective standards of fairness; and that makes each successive negotiation likely to be even better. (This does not mean that a negotiator should disclose everything or make unjustified concessions.)
Roger Fisher, “A Code of Negotiation Practices for Lawyers” (1985) 1 Negotiation Journal 105 at 106.
Return to footnote 9 referrer
I. William Zartman & Maureen Berman, The Practical Negotiator (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982) at 132, 226.
Return to footnote 10 referrer
See for example Eve Hill, “Alternative Dispute Resolution in a Feminist Voice” (1990) 5 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 337 at 370. Ms. Hill describes negotiation as a method of ADR that allows feminists to inject a female perspective into the process of dispute resolution.
Return to footnote 11 referrer
Jeffrey Z. Rubin and Frank E.A. Sander, “Culture, Negotiation and the Eye of the Beholder” (1991) 7 Negotiation Journal 249 at 253.
Zartman and Berman, supra, note 20 at 229.
Return to footnote 12 referrer
Fisher, Patton & Ury, supra, note 1 at 131-140.
Thomas R. Colosi, On and Off the Record: Colosi on Negotiation (Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 1993) at 54.
Return to footnote 13 referrer
Colosi, ibid. at 54-56.
Fisher, Patton & Ury, ibid. at 129-143.
William Ury, Getting Past No (New York: Bantam Books, 1991) esp. at 94-104.
Return to footnote 14 referrer
Thomas R. Colosi, On and Off the Record: Colosi on Negotiation (Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 1993) at 9-11.
Return to footnote 15 referrer
Colosi at 40-44.
Return to footnote 16 referrer
Fisher, Patton & Ury, supra, note 5 at 100.
Return to footnote 17 referrer
Ibid.
Return to footnote 18 referrer
The ideas found in this text have been derived from the works of a number of authors. However, the basic steps enumerated in this part are taken largely from Getting to Yes by Fisher, Patton and Ury.
Return to footnote 19 referrer
Colosi, note 23 at 52-53.
Return to footnote 20 referrer
A discussion of these tactics and how to deal with them can be found in Part E of this text “Dealing with Difficult or Deceptive Conduct” at page 10.
Return to footnote 21 referrer