Settlement negotiation follows patterns, and understanding them improves outcomes more than aggression does.
Prepare a reservation value. The point below which litigating is better, calculated from the decision analysis net of cost and time. Without it, negotiation is improvisation.
Anchoring. First offers influence outcomes, and an extreme anchor without justification is discounted and damages credibility. An aggressive but explained opening is more effective than either an extreme one or a reasonable one.
Concession patterns. Decreasing increments signal approach to a limit; constant increments signal room remaining. Both sides read them, and an undisciplined pattern gives away the reservation value.
Information. Both sides have private information about their own costs, risk tolerance and constraints. Disclosing selectively — a document that strengthens your case, a genuine budget constraint — moves negotiations that positional bargaining does not.
Non-monetary terms frequently close gaps: timing, structure, releases, confidentiality, ongoing business, and an agreed statement.
Deadlines create movement, and artificial ones that pass without consequence destroy credibility.
Authority. Know who on the other side decides, and structure the process so that person is engaged before the final session.