Negotiation Support
Strategic negotiation roadmap synthesizing case materials into leverage analysis, risk assessment, and tactical recommendations.
Prerequisites
- Matter context — parties, relationship history, negotiation type (settlement / contract / transactional / dispute resolution)
- Documents — contracts, correspondence, prior agreements, discovery, financials
- Client objectives — goals, constraints, authority limits, timeline
- Negotiation history — prior offers, counteroffers, impasses, tentative agreements
Quick Start
- Gather prerequisites above.
- Produce each output section in order (Executive Summary through Action Items).
- Cite source documents for every factual claim.
- Mark unconfirmed legal authority with
[VERIFY].
- Label the document as privileged work product.
Output Structure
1. Executive Summary
| Element |
Content |
| Negotiation type |
Settlement / contract / transactional / dispute resolution |
| Parties |
Names, roles, relationship summary |
| Core objectives |
Client's 3–5 primary goals, ranked |
| Critical issues |
Top issues driving negotiation |
| Recommended strategy |
Integrative vs. distributive; approach in 2–3 sentences |
| Key recommendation |
Single most important strategic action |
2. Factual Background
Chronological narrative with cited sources covering:
- Relationship history and negotiation genesis
- Key dates, amounts, communications, commitments
- Prior negotiation attempts and outcomes
- Current procedural posture or deal status
3. Interests & Positions Analysis
|
Client |
Opposing Party |
| Stated positions |
What they demand |
What they demand |
| Underlying interests |
Economic, operational, reputational, relational |
Same categories (estimated) |
| Constraints |
Authority, timeline, regulatory |
Likely constraints |
| Priorities |
Rank order of issues |
Estimated rank order |
| Pressure points |
Internal deadlines, stakeholder demands |
Likely pressures |
4. Leverage Assessment
Rate each factor High / Medium / Low for both sides:
| Leverage Type |
Client |
Opposing Party |
| Legal — claims strength, precedent, contractual position |
|
|
| Economic — resources, market position, alternatives |
|
|
| Informational — asymmetric knowledge, discovery exposure |
|
|
| Timing — deadlines, limitations periods, market windows |
|
|
| Relational — ongoing relationship value, reputation |
|
|
5. BATNA Analysis
|
Client |
Opposing Party (est.) |
| Best alternative |
|
|
| Likely outcome if no deal |
|
|
| Cost of no deal |
|
|
| Timeline of alternative |
|
|
| Risks of alternative |
|
|
| Reservation point |
Minimum acceptable |
Estimated walk-away |
| Target outcome |
Aspirational realistic goal |
|
6. Risk Matrix
| Risk |
Type |
Likelihood |
Impact |
Mitigation |
|
Legal / Business / Strategic |
H/M/L |
H/M/L |
Specific action |
Flag categories: litigation exposure, regulatory concerns, contractual weaknesses, reputational damage, precedent-setting risk, relationship damage.
7. Issue-by-Issue Plan
For each significant issue:
| Issue |
Opening |
Target |
Walk-Away |
Value to Us |
Value to Them |
|
|
|
|
H/M/L |
H/M/L |
Identify for each issue:
- Trade opportunities — low-cost concessions that are high-value to the other side
- Package proposals — bundled combinations that create value
- Sequencing — optimal order to address issues
8. Tactical Recommendations
Approach: integrative vs. distributive rationale, anchoring strategy, concession pattern (graduated / reciprocal / contingent), framing.
Anticipated arguments & responses:
| Opposing Argument |
Response |
Supporting Authority / Facts |
|
|
Cite documents, precedent, statutory provisions |
Process recommendations:
- Confidentiality protocol (NDA, FRE 408 / settlement privilege)
- Stakeholder involvement and escalation triggers
- Documentation protocol for offers and tentative agreements
- Expert input needs (financial, technical, industry)
9. Action Items
| Action |
Owner |
Deadline |
Priority |
| Pre-session preparations |
|
|
|
| Information to gather |
|
|
|
| Stakeholder decisions needed |
|
|
|
| Analysis to complete |
|
|
|
Include negotiation timeline with milestones.
Guidelines
- Candid assessment — acknowledge weaknesses; do not overstate leverage.
- Cite sources — tie every factual claim to specific materials reviewed.
- Jurisdiction-aware — flag rules affecting negotiation (FRE 408, state settlement privilege, mandatory mediation).
- Confidentiality — mark as privileged work product; note attorney-client privilege applicability.
- Actionable specificity — tailor every recommendation to the matter facts; no generic advice.
- Authority verification — mark unconfirmed authority with
[VERIFY].
- Living document — revise as new information emerges during negotiation.
Troubleshooting
- Missing client authority limits: Flag gap and request before drafting BATNA reservation points.
- Sparse opposing-party information: Mark estimated fields explicitly; recommend discovery or informal information-gathering steps.
- Multi-party negotiation: Duplicate the Interests & Leverage tables per party; note coalition dynamics.
- Cross-jurisdictional matters: Identify each jurisdiction's settlement privilege rules separately; flag conflicts.
1---2name: negotiation-support3description: Generates a strategic negotiation support document with leverage analysis, BATNA assessment, risk matrix, and issue-by-issue tactical planning. Use when preparing for settlement conferences, mediations, contract negotiations, deal structuring, or dispute resolution strategy sessions.4---56# Negotiation Support78Strategic negotiation roadmap synthesizing case materials into leverage analysis, risk assessment, and tactical recommendations.910## Prerequisites11121. **Matter context** — parties, relationship history, negotiation type (settlement / contract / transactional / dispute resolution)132. **Documents** — contracts, correspondence, prior agreements, discovery, financials143. **Client objectives** — goals, constraints, authority limits, timeline154. **Negotiation history** — prior offers, counteroffers, impasses, tentative agreements1617## Quick Start18191. Gather prerequisites above.202. Produce each output section in order (Executive Summary through Action Items).213. Cite source documents for every factual claim.224. Mark unconfirmed legal authority with `[VERIFY]`.235. Label the document as privileged work product.2425## Output Structure2627### 1. Executive Summary2829| Element | Content |30| --- | --- |31| Negotiation type | Settlement / contract / transactional / dispute resolution |32| Parties | Names, roles, relationship summary |33| Core objectives | Client's 3–5 primary goals, ranked |34| Critical issues | Top issues driving negotiation |35| Recommended strategy | Integrative vs. distributive; approach in 2–3 sentences |36| Key recommendation | Single most important strategic action |3738### 2. Factual Background3940Chronological narrative with cited sources covering:41- Relationship history and negotiation genesis42- Key dates, amounts, communications, commitments43- Prior negotiation attempts and outcomes44- Current procedural posture or deal status4546### 3. Interests & Positions Analysis4748| | Client | Opposing Party |49| --- | --- | --- |50| Stated positions | What they demand | What they demand |51| Underlying interests | Economic, operational, reputational, relational | Same categories (estimated) |52| Constraints | Authority, timeline, regulatory | Likely constraints |53| Priorities | Rank order of issues | Estimated rank order |54| Pressure points | Internal deadlines, stakeholder demands | Likely pressures |5556### 4. Leverage Assessment5758Rate each factor High / Medium / Low for both sides:5960| Leverage Type | Client | Opposing Party |61| --- | --- | --- |62| Legal — claims strength, precedent, contractual position | | |63| Economic — resources, market position, alternatives | | |64| Informational — asymmetric knowledge, discovery exposure | | |65| Timing — deadlines, limitations periods, market windows | | |66| Relational — ongoing relationship value, reputation | | |6768### 5. BATNA Analysis6970| | Client | Opposing Party (est.) |71| --- | --- | --- |72| Best alternative | | |73| Likely outcome if no deal | | |74| Cost of no deal | | |75| Timeline of alternative | | |76| Risks of alternative | | |77| **Reservation point** | Minimum acceptable | Estimated walk-away |78| **Target outcome** | Aspirational realistic goal | |7980### 6. Risk Matrix8182| Risk | Type | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |83| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |84| | Legal / Business / Strategic | H/M/L | H/M/L | Specific action |8586Flag categories: litigation exposure, regulatory concerns, contractual weaknesses, reputational damage, precedent-setting risk, relationship damage.8788### 7. Issue-by-Issue Plan8990For each significant issue:9192| Issue | Opening | Target | Walk-Away | Value to Us | Value to Them |93| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |94| | | | | H/M/L | H/M/L |9596Identify for each issue:97- **Trade opportunities** — low-cost concessions that are high-value to the other side98- **Package proposals** — bundled combinations that create value99- **Sequencing** — optimal order to address issues100101### 8. Tactical Recommendations102103**Approach:** integrative vs. distributive rationale, anchoring strategy, concession pattern (graduated / reciprocal / contingent), framing.104105**Anticipated arguments & responses:**106107| Opposing Argument | Response | Supporting Authority / Facts |108| --- | --- | --- |109| | | Cite documents, precedent, statutory provisions |110111**Process recommendations:**112- Confidentiality protocol (NDA, FRE 408 / settlement privilege)113- Stakeholder involvement and escalation triggers114- Documentation protocol for offers and tentative agreements115- Expert input needs (financial, technical, industry)116117### 9. Action Items118119| Action | Owner | Deadline | Priority |120| --- | --- | --- | --- |121| Pre-session preparations | | | |122| Information to gather | | | |123| Stakeholder decisions needed | | | |124| Analysis to complete | | | |125126Include negotiation timeline with milestones.127128## Guidelines129130- **Candid assessment** — acknowledge weaknesses; do not overstate leverage.131- **Cite sources** — tie every factual claim to specific materials reviewed.132- **Jurisdiction-aware** — flag rules affecting negotiation (FRE 408, state settlement privilege, mandatory mediation).133- **Confidentiality** — mark as privileged work product; note attorney-client privilege applicability.134- **Actionable specificity** — tailor every recommendation to the matter facts; no generic advice.135- **Authority verification** — mark unconfirmed authority with `[VERIFY]`.136- **Living document** — revise as new information emerges during negotiation.137138## Troubleshooting139140- **Missing client authority limits**: Flag gap and request before drafting BATNA reservation points.141- **Sparse opposing-party information**: Mark estimated fields explicitly; recommend discovery or informal information-gathering steps.142- **Multi-party negotiation**: Duplicate the Interests & Leverage tables per party; note coalition dynamics.143- **Cross-jurisdictional matters**: Identify each jurisdiction's settlement privilege rules separately; flag conflicts.144145---
lev-os