[xarien]

The problem with these "everybody wins" situation is that not everyone can win all the time. Same thing with being objective. The problem with this type of recommendation is that this approach to negotiations works well for situations such as conflict resolution where objectivity and a "nobody loses" scenario has inherent value. This is untrue for other types of negotiations, especially those related to financial gains.

Just like programming, more often than not, the simplest solution is often the best solution (in terms of ROI). There really isn't a need to over-complicate negotiations when goals are clearly defined. In the case of salary negotiations, the goal is to get paid as much as possible. That's it.

[kstenerud]

However, just as in programming, you cannot effectively employ the simple solution without first understanding the theory that leads to it.

It's just like the difference between good developers and voodoo coders. One stops to think before acting while the other just throws canned solutions at the problem, hoping one sticks.

[xarien]

I'll respectfully disagree. Theory is useful for designing algorithms, but has nothing to do with being a good programmer. Perhaps you mean understanding design (of tools, languages etc)? If that's the case, then yes, you need to understand your tools before using them. I'm not suggesting otherwise.

The easiest way of getting better at negotiations, like programming, is actually just about practice.