Best alternative to a negotiated agreement

BATNA ( " Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement" ) is a negotiating strategy and provides the determined best alternative to a planned negotiating objective dar.

The term comes from the Harvard Concept as a method of principled negotiation and was founded in 1981 by Roger Fisher and William Ury in the publication Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in embossed. It is the search for possible alternatives and determining the best alternative is an important point in the trial preparation and an essential factor for successful negotiations, with the aim to strengthen its negotiating position. BATNA is to create clarity, what other options are always available and what procedures can be received, should fail the forthcoming negotiations. BATNA represents the ( flexible ) orientation point which the negotiator sets as a limit for whether a negotiated exit seems cheaper than a conclusion of negotiations.

This BATNA is more promising than setting a rigid limits ( "So much I want to achieve a maximum or minimum received, otherwise the transaction is failed " ), because the more important question of the existing alternatives in the event of failure of the transaction is cleared.

Closely related to BATNA ZOPA ( "Zone of Potential Agreement" ) is called and the overlap of the areas in which the negotiators see opportunities for a degree.