Understanding ZOPA is essential for a successful negotiation, but negotiators must first know their BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement) or “from positions”.  To determine whether there is a ZOPA, both parties must consider each other`s interests and values. This should be done at the early start of negotiations and should be adapted if more information is learned. The size of the ZOPA is also essential. If a broad APA is given, the parties could use strategies and tactics to influence distribution within the ZOPA. If the parties have a small ZOPA, the difficulty is to find pleasant conditions. When both parties know their BATNAs and leave their positions, the parties should be able to communicate, evaluate the proposed agreements and, finally, identify the ZOPA. However, parties often do not know their own BATNA and even less know the BATNA on the other side. Often, the parties can pretend to have a better alternative than they really do, because the right alternatives usually lead to more power in negotiations. This is explained in more detail in the BATN trial.
However, the result of such deception could be the obvious absence of ZOPA – and therefore a failure of negotiation when there was actually a ZOPA. Common uncertainties may also affect the parties` ability to assess potential agreements, as the parties may be unrealistic or pessimistic about the possibility of reaching an agreement or the value of other options.  The Acceptance Zone The area of the agreement Unification Deficit See also the negative negotiating areas can be overcome if the parties to the negotiations are ready to learn about the wishes and needs of the other. Suppose Dave explains to Suzy that he wants to use the proceeds from the sale of the bike to buy new skis and ski equipment. Suzy has a pair of soft, high-quality skis that she would like to part with. Dave is willing to take less money for mountain biking when Suzy throws used skis there. The two sides have reached an agreement on ZOPA and can therefore reach a fruitful agreement. Negotiators talk about building an agreement, bluffing the opposition and coming back and forth. According to mediator Thomas Smith, careful attention to these metaphors may reveal a deeper meaning among the explicit words that people use, especially in terms of how they perceive the negotiation process and their relationship. … Read more Of course, common sense dictates that if there is no overlap in the seller`s and buyer`s waiting areas, an agreement becomes highly unlikely.