A negotiation where one or both parties are unprepared can be disastrous. At best, the negotiation devolves into a loose and unfocused conversation. In the worst-case scenario, however, a negotiation can turn into an adversarial confrontation. The RADPAC model is a basic negotiation framework used in business to reach a favorable outcome for two or more parties.
Table of Contents
Understanding the RADPAC model
The RADPAC model is a simple framework giving structure to a formal negotiation process and is widely used in business and corporate contexts.
Most importantly, the model increases the likelihood a favorable and meaningful outcome eventuates for both sides.
In the next section, we’ll discuss the various components of the approach.
The six components of the RADPAC model
The RADPAC model is made up of six components which give the model its name:
Rapport (R)
Before starting the negotiation itself, both parties must first work to develop rapport with friendly, social conversation.
This creates a comfortable and collaborative environment and if done correctly, sets a positive tone for the rest of the process.
Analysis (A)
To begin the formal negotiation, each party must understand the perspective of the other by establishing facts and empathizing with feelings where possible.
The point of this step is to develop an understanding of the other party and establish a basis for negotiation.
There is no need for both parties to be in agreement.
Otherwise, there would be no need for negotiation in the first place.
Debate (D)
When many people think of debating, they assume it to be a zero-sum game where one party wins at the expense of the other.
However, debating in a negotiation means searching for mutually agreeable solutions by maintaining a collaborative environment.
Proposal (P)
In the fourth step, one or both parties suggests viable and mutually agreeable solutions.
These solutions may partially or completely satisfy the needs of each party, depending on how well the negotiation has been handled until this point.
In any case, a compromise acceptable to all should be the ultimate objective.
Agreement (A)
The agreement stage begins with both parties restating what they have agreed to in the proposal stage.
The logistics of the proposal – such as the allocation of time, money, and other resources – should also be discussed and defined.
Lastly, the agreement should be recorded and read back to everyone in the room to ensure it is correct.
Close (C)
A successful close should leave the door open for future negotiation between the two parties.
Each party should thank the other for playing their role and then make a firm commitment to undertake any follow-up actions.
Case Studies
Apple’s Supplier Negotiations:
Rapport: Apple maintains strong relationships with its suppliers by fostering open communication channels and understanding their needs and challenges.
Analysis: Apple analyzes the market conditions, supplier capabilities, and global economic factors to make informed decisions during negotiations.
Debate: Negotiations with suppliers involve collaborative discussions to achieve win-win solutions, such as fair pricing and quality standards.
Proposal: Apple proposes terms that benefit both parties, often including long-term contracts and commitments to sustainability.
Agreement: The company finalizes agreements, specifying product quantities, delivery schedules, and quality benchmarks.
Close: Apple ensures ongoing collaboration and performance evaluations, leaving room for future negotiations and improvements.
Google’s Licensing Negotiations:
Rapport: Google establishes rapport with content creators and licensors by understanding their content needs and business goals.
Analysis: In negotiations for content licensing, Google analyzes viewer preferences, market demand, and competitive landscapes.
Debate: Google engages in debates that focus on revenue-sharing models and content distribution strategies, aiming for mutually beneficial outcomes.
Proposal: The company proposes licensing terms that consider both parties’ interests, such as revenue splits and content exclusivity.
Agreement: Google finalizes agreements, outlining payment schedules, content access, and copyright terms.
Close: Post-negotiation, Google monitors content performance, addressing concerns, and exploring future collaboration opportunities.
Microsoft’s Software Licensing Negotiations:
Rapport: Microsoft builds rapport with corporate clients through personalized consultations, understanding their software needs.
Analysis: In negotiations, Microsoft analyzes clients’ software requirements, budget constraints, and compliance concerns.
Debate: The company engages in debates regarding software bundles, licensing models, and support services to reach mutually advantageous agreements.
Proposal: Microsoft presents tailored software licensing proposals, offering flexible options, volume discounts, and compliance assistance.
Agreement: Agreements detail software usage rights, pricing structures, and support levels.
Close: Microsoft maintains an ongoing relationship, offering software updates, training, and addressing client-specific needs.
Amazon’s Vendor Negotiations:
Rapport: Amazon develops rapport with vendors by understanding their product lines, supply chain capabilities, and inventorymanagement.
Analysis: In negotiations with vendors, Amazon assesses market demand, pricing dynamics, and quality control measures.
Debate: Negotiations often focus on pricing, delivery schedules, and product specifications while maintaining a collaborative tone.
Proposal: Amazon proposes terms that balance cost-effectiveness with product quality, ensuring a win-win situation.
Agreement: Vendor agreements specify order quantities, pricing structures, and delivery terms.
Close: Amazon regularly evaluates vendor performance, addressing any issues promptly and exploring opportunities for expanding the partnership.
Facebook’s Advertiser Negotiations:
Rapport: Facebook builds rapport with advertisers by understanding their marketing objectives, target audiences, and campaign goals.
Analysis: In negotiations, Facebook analyzes advertising budgets, ad performance data, and industry trends.
Debate: Negotiations revolve around ad placement, targeting options, and budget allocation, aiming for effective ad campaigns.
Proposal: Facebook proposes advertising solutions tailored to the advertiser’s needs, including ad formats and audience targeting.
Agreement: Advertising agreements detail campaign budgets, duration, and performance metrics.
Close: Tesla collaborates with suppliers on ongoing product innovation and efficiency improvements.
Netflix’s Content Acquisition Negotiations:
Rapport: Netflix builds rapport with content creators and studios by understanding their artistic vision and content distribution goals.
Analysis: In content acquisition negotiations, Netflix analyzes viewer preferences, global content trends, and audience demographics.
Debate: Negotiations often involve discussions on licensing terms, exclusivity agreements, and original content production.
Proposal: Netflix presents content licensing proposals that offer fair compensation to creators and align with its streaming strategy.
Agreement: Content agreements outline licensing terms, royalties, and distribution windows.
Close: Netflix collaborates with content partners on promotion and audience engagement, fostering long-term content relationships.
Microsoft’s Cloud Services Negotiations:
Rapport: Microsoft builds rapport with enterprise clients by understanding their digital transformation goals, data security concerns, and scalability needs.
Analysis: In negotiations for cloud services, Microsoft assesses clients’ IT infrastructure, compliance requirements, and budget constraints.
Debate: Negotiations revolve around service-level agreements (SLAs), pricing models, and data migration strategies to ensure a seamless transition.
Proposal: Microsoft proposes customized cloud solutions that enhance productivity, data management, and cybersecurity for clients.
Agreement: Cloud service agreements detail pricing structures, data privacy provisions, and support levels.
Close: Microsoft offers ongoing technical support, training, and optimization services to ensure client success in the cloud.
Uber’s Regulatory Negotiations:
Rapport: Uber works to establish rapport with local governments and regulators by addressing transportation challenges and safety concerns.
Analysis: In regulatory negotiations, Uber analyzes local transportation regulations, rider safety measures, and environmental impact assessments.
Debate: Negotiations often focus on regulatory compliance, ride-sharing policies, and public-private partnerships for urban mobility solutions.
Proposal: Uber proposes regulatory frameworks that accommodate innovative transportation models while ensuring public safety and accessibility.
Agreement: Agreements with local authorities outline regulatory requirements, data-sharing protocols, and safety standards.
Close: Uber collaborates with cities on pilot programs, data sharing, and community engagement to enhance urban transportation.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Enterprise Agreements:
Rapport: AWS builds rapport with enterprise clients by understanding their cloud migration objectives, application workloads, and compliance needs.
Analysis: In negotiations for enterprise cloud solutions, AWS assesses clients’ existing infrastructure, cost optimization opportunities, and security requirements.
Debate: Negotiations revolve around contract terms, pricing models, and service integrations to align AWS services with client goals.
Proposal: AWS presents tailored enterprise agreements that offer flexibility, scalability, and cost-effective cloud solutions.
Agreement: Enterprise agreements detail service-level commitments, pricing tiers, and data protection measures.
Close: AWS provides ongoing support, training, and cloud optimization services to help clients achieve their digital transformation objectives.
Integrate WATNA, BATNA and ZOPA
Preparing for a negotiation is critical to make it a successful one.
You don’t have to overthink it; however, with some mental models as companions with the RADPAC model, you can walk into any negotiation.
Indeed, within the RADPAC model, you can define your “area of agreement” as the area within which negotiation is successful for both parties.
In negotiation, WATNA stands for “worst alternative to a negotiated agreement,” representing one of several alternative options if a resolution cannot be reached. This is a useful technique to help understand what might be a negotiation outcome, that even if negative is still better than a WATNA, making the deal still feasible.
Once you have your WATNA laid out, you have pretty much set the boundaries of the negotiation and the “zone of non-agreement,” meaning that zone where none of the parties would be satisfied with the negotiation.
And you set some worst alternatives/case scenarios in case you are in that area.
Now that your WATNA is set, you want to look for your BATNA.
In negotiation theory, BATNA stands for “Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement,” and it’s one of the key tenets of negotiation theory. Indeed, it describes the best course of action a party can take if negotiations fail to reach an agreement. This simple strategy can help improve the negotiation as each party is (in theory) willing to take the best course of action, as otherwise, an agreement won’t be reached.
Also, here, you define an alternative in case the negotiation falls into negative territory.
Once you have figured out both WATNA and BATNA now, you can confidently define you’re “zone of possible agreement” or ZOPA.
The ZOPA (zone of possible agreement) describes an area in which two negotiation parties may find common ground. Indeed, ZOPA is critical to explore the deals where the parties get a mutually beneficial outcome to prevent the risk of a win-lose, or lose-win scenario. And therefore get to the point of a win-win negotiation outcome.
This is an area where both parties get a beneficial outcome, thus a win-win scenario.
These mental models, included in the RADPAC model, might help make it more effective.
As you define the areas where there are no mutual benefits to close the agreement as the boundaries of the negotiation.
And the area where there are mutual benefits to closing the agreement is the zone within to close the negotiation!
Key takeaways
The RADPAC model is a basic negotiation framework used in business to reach a favorable outcome for two or more parties.
The RADPAC model gives structure and clarity to a formal negotiation process. This avoids a scenario where the negotiation deteriorates into an adversarial confrontation or becomes loose and unfocused.
The RADPAC model is based on six key steps: rapport, analysis, debate, proposal, agreement, and close. Both parties should take their time moving through the steps to foster a collaborative environment.
The Fishbone Diagram is a diagram-based technique used in brainstorming to identify potential causes for a problem, thus it is a visual representation of cause and effect. The problem or effect serves as the head of the fish. Possible causes of the problem are listed on the individual “bones” of the fish. This encourages problem-solving teams to consider a wide range of alternatives.
In negotiation theory, BATNA stands for “Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement,” and it’s one of the key tenets of negotiation theory. Indeed, it describes the best course of action a party can take if negotiations fail to reach an agreement. This simple strategy can help improve the negotiation as each party is (in theory) willing to take the best course of action, as otherwise, an agreement won’t be reached.
In negotiation, WATNA stands for “worst alternative to a negotiated agreement,” representing one of several alternative options if a resolution cannot be reached. This is a useful technique to help understand what might be a negotiation outcome, that even if negative is still better than a WATNA, making the deal still feasible.
The ZOPA (zone of possible agreement) describes an area in which two negotiation parties may find common ground. Indeed, ZOPA is critical to exploring the deals where the parties get a mutually beneficial outcome to prevent the risk of a win-lose, or lose-win scenario. And therefore get to the point of a win-win negotiation outcome.
In a logrolling negotiation, one party offers a concession on one issue to gain ground on another issue. In logrolling, there is no desire by either party to advertise the extent of their power, rights, or entitlements. This makes it a particularly effective strategy in complex negotiations where partial or complete impasses exist.
The Theory of Constraints was developed in 1984 by businessmanagement guru Eliyahu Goldratt in his book The Goal. The Theory of Constraints argues that every system has at least one constraint that hinders high-level performance or profit generation. Fundamentally, the theory advocates identifying constraints and then eliminating them or at the very least, reducing their impact.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
