Dear Negotiation Explorer,

welcome to week 10 of our NegoAI series.

Today, we are going to explore a challenge we face building AI assistants: how to distill comprehensive knowledge and nuanced negotiation preparation for seamless integration into platforms like Microsoft Copilot.

While we utilize specialized tools like TypingMind and Cassidy AI, recognizing that most companies use widely available platforms like Copilot is essential, which necessitates adapting our comprehensive approach to fit their character limitations without sacrificing depth or clarity.

The Challenge of Comprehensive Preparation in Limited Spaces

In one of our latest experiments with Deepak Negotiator—the archetype of a comprehensive assistant—we witnessed its powerful capabilities.

By uploading a simple role-play prompt, Deepak generated a granular negotiation preparation sheet.

This included everything from stakeholder mapping and issue analysis to creative value creation strategies and anticipating counterparty objections.

The result? Full preparation was achieved.

However, this very comprehensiveness presents a hurdle.

While Deepak’s 78,000-character guidance ensures exhaustive readiness, client platforms like Copilot and ChatGPT impose strict character limits (10,000 and 8,000 characters respectively).

This means we have to rethink how much detail we provide—and how strategically we condense our knowledge.

Putting It to the Test

Our process? Start by distilling the most valuable components.

We trimmed the system instructions from 78,000 to 9,100 characters—maintaining the essence: parties, objectives, interests, issues, creative options, strategy, and actionable tactics.

Real-world test proved the new format still empowered the behavioral assistant to prepare users for complex negotiations—thematic alignment, creative brainstorming, and strategic agility remained intact, despite the brevity.

In the next section is an example of the output provided by Microsoft Copilot and the distilled Negotiation Assistant, using the same role play we used for the comprehensive Deepak.

This experiment underscores an important lesson for all negotiation innovators: sometimes, the depth of your preparation depends not just on content, but on your ability to prioritize and structure what matters most.

Microsoft Copilot Output

Negotiation with: Jones & Solomon Law Firm

Objective: Sell the 300-volume set of Japanese commercial law materials at a favorable price, including covering shipping costs.

1. Interests (Our and Theirs)

Our Interests:

• Modernization: Transitioning to digital legal resources aligns with Burns & Allen's strategy.

• Efficiency: Reducing logistics complexity before the firm’s move.

• Value Optimization: Securing a price higher than the $21,000 offer from the clearinghouse.

Top 3 Our Interests:

• Sell entire collection at a fair price.

• Minimize logistics burden (shipping responsibility).

• Support transition to modernized legal resources.

Their Interests (Likely):

• Access to Specialized Knowledge: Enhancing their Japanese commercial law resources.

• Cost Efficiency: Obtaining useful legal materials at a reasonable price.

• Library Expansion: Strengthening their international practice expertise.

Top 3 Their Interests (Likely):

• Secure a valuable addition to their legal library.

• Obtain books in good condition at a reasonable cost.

• Limit costs related to acquisition and logistics.

2. Issues and Options

List of Issues:

• Price of the 300-volume collection.

• Logistics and cost of shipping.

• Payment structure (lump sum vs installment).

• Condition and usability of books.

• Bundling additional benefits (e.g., discount on digital subscriptions).

Key Issue: Final sale price and shipping cost responsibility.

Creative Options for Resolution:

• Offer Jones & Solomon a package deal including logistical support.

• Bulk-rate shipping negotiation as a cost-sharing method.

• Framing the offer with a limited-time urgency due to the firm's relocation.

3. Objective Arguments

Our Arguments (Using Data & Standards):

• Market Value Justification:

  • Original aggregate purchase cost: ~$24,000.

  • Estimated cost of new replacements today: ~$30,000.

  • Additional sourcing effort costs: $2,000–$4,000.

• Book Condition:

  • ~30% of volumes are unused, making them nearly new.

  • Remaining books are serviceable and still valuable due to limited online availability.

• Urgency & Logistics:

  • Moving deadline in two weeks makes transaction timeliness critical.

  • Local pick-up option could save them costs.

Addressing Their Likely Objections:

• "The price seems too high."

  • Reply: "The clearinghouse has already offered $21,000, which is below market replacement value. Your acquisition cost through independent sourcing could be significantly higher."

• "Shipping costs should be covered by the seller."

  • Reply: "Given the discounted package deal and ease of acquisition, we would expect shipping responsibility to remain with the buyer. Alternatively, we could negotiate a shared-cost approach."

4. Alternatives (BATNA & Power Analysis)

Our BATNA: Accept the $21,000 clearinghouse offer (low leverage). Their Likely BATNA: Source books independently (higher cost and complexity) [~].

Power Balance Assessment:

• Our urgency weakens our position, but the unique collection strengthens our leverage.

• Their need for specialized legal resources increases our ability to negotiate pricing.

• Factors: Time constraint, availability of similar books, cost-efficiency of bulk acquisition.

5. Aspirations (Target Numbers)

6. Questions to Uncover Key Info

• What is Jones & Solomon’s expected budget for library expansion?

• Do they have alternative sourcing options for similar materials?

• Would they consider paying a premium for fast transaction and delivery?

• Are they concerned about specific parts of the collection more than others?

7. Opportunities to Make Trades

Value More: Price, reducing logistics burden. Value Less: Minor concessions on shipping costs, installment payment flexibility.

8. Negotiation Strategy

Behavior/Style: Collaborative, data-backed argumentation. Order/Approach: Structured deal with logical pricing breakdown. Key Tactics:

• Leverage urgency to speed up decision-making.

• Use objective cost estimates and condition descriptions to justify price.

• Offer alternative shipping arrangements to keep price higher.

• Frame acquisition as a rare opportunity for high-quality Japanese legal materials.

Would you like to refine any assumptions, expand on specific analysis areas, or explore alternative price structuring?
 

  Could you provide more creative options to enlarge the pie?

Absolutely! Here are some creative strategies to expand the value of the negotiation beyond just price and logistics:

Creative Value-Expansion Options:

1. Bundled Knowledge Access

• Include complementary digital resources (trial access to modernized online legal databases related to Japanese law).

• Offer consultation from Burns & Allen legal experts on Japanese commercial law for a fixed period (e.g., a few advisory calls or a training session).

• Propose collaborative research exchange, where Burns & Allen shares past case insights or strategic notes alongside the books.

2. Structuring the Deal for Long-Term Benefit

• Tiered payment options: Allow Jones & Solomon to pay in installments, making the purchase easier while securing a higher total price.

• Subscription model: Include an option where Burns & Allen provides annual updates or key supplementary materials on emerging Japanese law topics.

• Future referral agreement: Burns & Allen could refer international commercial clients specifically needing Japanese law expertise to Jones & Solomon, strengthening their practice.

3. Logistics & Efficiency Enhancements

• Discounted shipping arrangement: If Jones & Solomon purchases at a premium price, Burns & Allen can negotiate bulk shipping rates to split logistics costs.

• Flexible pickup window: If needed, Jones & Solomon could schedule a convenient pickup to avoid rushed delivery expenses.

• Donation & prestige option: Offer public acknowledgment (press release, industry journal mention) that positions Jones & Solomon as expanding their Japanese legal resources, boosting their reputation.

4. Reciprocity-Based Incentives

• Cross-training opportunity: Establish a mutual knowledge-sharing initiative between firms, where associates from both sides collaborate on international business law workshops.

• Reciprocal discounted services: Jones & Solomon could offer discounted advisory services in another legal domain of interest to Burns & Allen.

• Co-author publication: A joint industry article on Japanese commercial law, leveraging expertise from both firms and strengthening visibility.

Would you like to explore structured negotiation framing using any of these strategies?

This Week’s Exercise

Take 20 minutes to analyze a negotiation scenario you’d like to prep for.

1. Limit yourself to a single-page (10,000 characters or less) framework—just like you would in Copilot.

2. Focus on high-utility sections: Identify the parties, clarify objectives, surface principal interests, list alternatives (BATNA), and brainstorm at least three creative value options.

3. Reflect: Did this forced brevity help sharpen your focus—or did you miss having a more exhaustive toolbox?

By practicing this skill, you’ll cultivate the strategic discipline needed for high-pressure, time-limited negotiation environments.

Preview of Next week

Next week, we will shift our focus to negotiation across cultures. We will explore the development of an AI assistant designed to support you in understanding and navigating cultural differences in negotiations.