Chapter 16 Further Reading

These twelve sources span the research and applied literature on conflict diagnosis, dispute system design, negotiation preparation, and the psychology of self-assessment in conflict. They are organized from foundational frameworks to specialized applications.

Foundational Texts

1. Ury, W. L., Brett, J. M., & Goldberg, S. B. (1988). Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict. Jossey-Bass.

The primary source for the interests/rights/power framework covered in this chapter. The book draws on Ury, Brett, and Goldberg's empirical research in coal mining disputes and other organizational settings to develop a comprehensive theory of dispute system design. Part One — which covers the three approaches to resolving disputes and the principle of designing systems to focus on interests — is essential reading. The book's central argument is not just descriptive (here is how conflicts work) but prescriptive (here is how to build systems that produce better outcomes). Essential for anyone interested in organizational conflict architecture, and foundational for individual-level diagnosis as well. The 1993 Jossey-Bass revised edition includes an additional chapter on international applications.

2. Stone, D., Patton, B., & Heen, S. (2010). Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most (2nd ed.). Penguin Books.

The contribution framework in Section 16.5 comes directly from this book. Stone, Patton, and Heen — all faculty or affiliates of the Harvard Negotiation Project — developed the "three conversations" model: the What Happened Conversation, the Feelings Conversation, and the Identity Conversation. Their treatment of the contribution system is the most nuanced available in the practitioner literature. Chapter 4 ("Abandon Blame: Map the Contribution System") is specifically relevant to this chapter's content. The book's distinction between intent and impact, and their analysis of how we perceive our own behavior versus others', is empirically grounded in social psychology research. Highly readable; the most assigned text in organizational conflict courses after Fisher and Ury.

3. Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (3rd ed.). Penguin Books.

The foundational text for interest-based negotiation, originating from the Harvard Negotiation Project. The position/interest distinction in Chapter 15 of this textbook draws directly on Fisher and Ury's work. Getting to Yes introduced the concept of "principled negotiation" — separating people from the problem, focusing on interests not positions, generating options for mutual gain, and insisting on objective criteria. These four principles are the building blocks of interest-based conflict resolution. The third edition includes a new chapter on the ten most common questions people ask about the framework and its limitations. Start here for anyone new to the interest-based approach.

4. Mnookin, R. H., Peppet, S. R., & Tulumello, A. S. (2000). Beyond Winning: Negotiating to Create Value in Deals and Disputes. Harvard University Press.

A sophisticated extension of the Getting to Yes framework, written for practitioners who find that the basic model does not fully account for the complexity of high-stakes negotiations. Mnookin, Peppet, and Tulumello introduce the concept of the "tension" between creating value and claiming it, and develop practical tools for managing this tension. Chapters 5 and 6, on understanding interests and the role of information in negotiation preparation, are directly relevant to the diagnostic framework in this chapter. The book is written primarily for lawyers and business negotiators but is accessible and applicable to any high-stakes conflict situation.

Negotiation Preparation and Pre-Conversation Analysis

5. Malhotra, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2007). Negotiation Genius: How to Overcome Obstacles and Achieve Brilliant Results at the Bargaining Table and Beyond. Bantam Books.

Malhotra and Bazerman's research-grounded approach to negotiation preparation is among the most rigorous in the literature. Their concept of "investigative negotiation" — entering a negotiation as an investigator, seeking to understand the other party's constraints, interests, and alternatives rather than simply asserting your own — is directly applicable to the diagnostic framework in this chapter. Chapters 2 and 3, on preparation and on understanding the other side, are especially relevant. The book's treatment of "negotiation traps" — cognitive biases that cause even sophisticated negotiators to prepare poorly or reason badly — is a useful companion to this chapter's self-diagnostic material.

6. Mnookin, R. H. (2010). Bargaining with the Devil: When to Negotiate, When to Fight. Simon & Schuster.

A different kind of negotiation book — one that takes seriously the question of when not to negotiate. Mnookin examines high-stakes cases (Nelson Mandela and the apartheid government, IBM and Fujitsu, the Gottschalk v. Benson Supreme Court case) to explore the conditions under which negotiation is genuinely appropriate versus cases where other approaches — including principled resistance — are wiser. This is essential reading for understanding the limits of the interest-based framework: not every conflict should be resolved collaboratively, and knowing when interests-based approaches are inappropriate is part of diagnosis. Relevant to the chapter's treatment of when rights or power approaches are genuinely necessary.

Psychology of Self-Assessment and Contribution

7. Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2007). Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. Harcourt.

The psychological foundation for why the "when you're part of the problem" section of this chapter is so difficult to work through honestly. Tavris and Aronson's account of cognitive dissonance and self-justification explains the mechanisms by which people construct narratives that protect their self-image while distorting their understanding of their own contribution to conflict. Their concept of the "pyramid of choice" — how small initial decisions gradually lead to positions that would have been unrecognizable at the start — is particularly illuminating for understanding how people who do not think of themselves as unjust can find themselves behaving unjustly toward others. Essential background reading for anyone who wants to understand why diagnosis of one's own contribution is consistently the hardest diagnostic task.

8. Pronin, E., Gilovich, T., & Ross, L. (2004). The objectivity illusion: Perceptions of bias in self versus others. Psychological Review, 111(3), 781-799.

A seminal academic paper on what the authors call the "bias blind spot" — the consistent tendency for people to recognize bias in others' reasoning while failing to see it in their own. Pronin, Gilovich, and Ross demonstrate through multiple experimental studies that people believe they are more objective than their peers and more objective than they actually are. This finding directly underlies the chapter's argument that self-diagnosis of contribution requires structured, written analysis rather than introspective self-assessment alone — because introspection about one's own biases is itself subject to bias. Accessible to non-specialist readers; available through most university library systems.

Stakeholder Systems and Organizational Conflict

9. Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (2006). 3-D Negotiation: Powerful Tools to Change the Game in Your Most Important Deals. Harvard Business School Press.

Lax and Sebenius's "3-D" framework extends the standard preparation model by insisting that negotiators attend not only to the process of the conversation (what happens in the room) but to the setup — the full system of stakeholders, interests, and structures that surround the conversation before it begins. Their analysis of "deal design" and stakeholder mapping is among the most sophisticated available in the practical literature. Chapter 4 ("Map the Parties and Their Interests") and Chapter 6 ("Understand the Full Set of Interests at Stake") are directly applicable to the stakeholder mapping section of this chapter. Written for business deal-making but the frameworks transfer directly to organizational and interpersonal conflict.

10. Kolb, D. M., & Williams, J. (2003). Everyday Negotiation: Navigating the Hidden Agendas in Bargaining. Jossey-Bass.

Kolb and Williams focus on the hidden dynamics in negotiations — what they call the "shadow negotiation," the process by which parties position themselves, establish the terms of engagement, and signal what kind of conversation this will be. Their treatment of stakeholder mapping, coalition dynamics, and "moves and turns" in the pre-negotiation phase is particularly useful for understanding how the "audience" for a conflict shapes what is possible in the conversation itself. Chapter 2 ("The Shadow Negotiation") and Chapter 5 ("Turning the Tables") are most relevant to this chapter's material. Notably attentive to how gender dynamics and power operate in negotiation settings that are often treated as neutral.

Dispute Systems Design

11. Costantino, C. A., & Merchant, C. S. (1996). Designing Conflict Management Systems: A Guide to Creating Productive and Healthy Organizations. Jossey-Bass.

A practical companion to Ury, Brett, and Goldberg's theoretical framework, focused on how organizations actually build dispute resolution systems that push conflict toward interest-based resolution. Costantino and Merchant provide detailed case studies of system design in healthcare, government, financial services, and educational institutions. For readers interested in the organizational application of this chapter's frameworks — how to design contexts that make diagnostic preparation standard practice rather than exceptional effort — this is the key applied text. Chapter 3 ("The Spectrum of Options: From Prevention to Litigation") provides a practical version of the interests/rights/power continuum.

12. Susskind, L., & Cruikshank, J. (1987). Breaking the Impasse: Consensual Approaches to Resolving Public Disputes. Basic Books.

Susskind and Cruikshank bring the interest-based framework to its most complex application: disputes between governments, communities, and corporations over public policy issues — environmental regulation, land use, infrastructure development. Their development of "mutual gains negotiation" and "consensus building" as alternatives to adversarial public dispute resolution addresses a dimension absent from most practitioner-focused negotiation texts: how the framework applies when there are many parties with very different kinds of interests, when the "relationship" is a civic or political one rather than a personal or organizational one, and when the stakes include community-level consequences. Relevant for readers who want to understand the full range of contexts to which interest-based diagnosis applies — and its limits.

A Note on Reading Strategy

The sources in this list can be read as a coherent curriculum. Start with Fisher, Ury, and Patton (Getting to Yes) for the foundational interest-based framework. Then read Stone, Patton, and Heen (Difficult Conversations) for the interpersonal and psychological dimension. Then read Ury, Brett, and Goldberg (Getting Disputes Resolved) for the empirical foundation and system-design perspective. The remaining sources extend, deepen, or challenge the core framework in specific directions. Tavris and Aronson's work on self-justification provides essential psychological grounding for the "when you're part of the problem" section of this chapter, and is recommended for anyone who finds that section difficult to apply honestly to themselves — which is most people.