A BATNA, or Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement, is a way of judging whether a negotiation is truly in one’s interests. If the best agreement a negotiator can get is worse than no agreement, the BATNA becomes the default choice. However, most times parties to a dispute will be worse off without a deal. In that case, it’s best to shore up the least-bad alternative, which provides a fallback position—it may, if strong enough, compel the other side to improve its offer.

Though not unique to negotiating, brainstorming can be highly useful in resolving disputes, and it’s a main pillar of the book’s problem-solving process. A brainstorming session should be done privately in a small group, where ideas, many of them wild or seemingly absurd, are generated without criticism until the group has a long list of possible solutions, which then can be winnowed for the most useful ones. These are presented to the other side as possible ways to a breakthrough.

Because the brainstorming process generates multiple ideas, it leads negotiations away from one-size-fits-all, take-it-or-leave-it positional bargaining. A collection of several ideas provides the luxury of many options and the ability to hit upon some combination or adaptation of ideas that work well to resolve a dispute.