Principles › Working it out
Working it out
Us against the problem
Two people facing a problem, not two sides.
For example
Porcupine · a tipYou both want weekends to feel restful. Jordan, what would that look like for you?
How Porcupine uses it
- Porcupine guides a conversation through four stages: hear each other, find the need, solve it together, agree on next steps.
- “Where you stand” names what each of you needs, not just what you’re asking for.
- The wrap-up records only what you actually agreed. It never invents an agreement.
In practice
Frame it as the two of you against the problem.
Name what the other person does well, even mid-disagreement.
Look for the reason behind each demand. Solutions come from the reasons.
Invite disagreement and questions without penalty.
Why it helps
In negotiation studies, people who cared about both sides’ outcomes, while still holding firm on their own needs, argued less and reached better agreements than people out only for themselves. Behind most demands (“she can’t stay two weeks”) is a reason (“I need some time at home to myself”), and a reason can usually be met in more ways than a demand can. Saying what you appreciate can remind both people the relationship is bigger than the problem.
What we don’t know yet
“Interests, not positions” has been tested mostly in negotiation experiments between strangers, and in community mediation. It has been tested much less in close relationships. And the research on appreciation looked at everyday life, not the middle of a disagreement.
See it in a conversation
- How to ask your partner for more help at homePartners
- How to tell someone you’re not interested, kindlyDating
- How to message your co-parent about a schedule changeCo-parents
- How to stay friends with your exExes
- How to tell your family you’re not coming home for the holidaysAnyone in the family
- How to reconnect with a friend you’ve lost touch withFriends
The research
Studied with adults in general
A meta-analysis of negotiation studies found that people who cared about both sides’ outcomes argued less, problem-solved more and reached better joint agreements, as long as they also held firm on what they needed.
Studied with couples
A meta-analysis of 64 studies of couples’ conflicts, from many research groups, found that problem solving and warmth during conflict went with higher relationship satisfaction, and hostility with lower.
Studied with couples
In a study of couples’ conflict conversations, those who used more “we” language showed more positive emotion, less negative behavior and lower physiological arousal.
More research
Studied with roommates
In a study of randomly assigned college roommates of different races or ethnicities, students who felt early on that they shared a common identity with people from other backgrounds stayed friendly with their roommate over time, while friendship declined for those who didn’t.
Studied with couples
In a study where couples kept daily diaries, gratitude between partners on one day predicted feeling more connected and satisfied the next day, for both of them.
Studied with adults in general
In three experiments, people who wrote thank you letters underestimated how good the person receiving it would feel, and overestimated how awkward it would be.
Studied with adults in general
In two negotiation experiments, asking about or sharing what each side cared about led people to judge each other more accurately and reach agreements that were better for both. It worked even when only one side did it, and sharing didn’t cost the person who shared.
Studied with adults in general
In three negotiation studies, people who thought about the other side’s point of view found agreements that weren’t obvious and did better for both sides. Feeling for the other side (empathy) helped less, and sometimes got in the way of finding a deal.
Studied with adults in general
In a study of 73 community mediation sessions, followed up 4 to 8 months later, how good the agreement looked didn’t predict how things went afterward. Solving the problem together went with the person who brought the complaint seeing relations as improved, and a process that felt fair went with lasting success.
Studied with coworkers
In a study of work teams, those whose members felt safe to speak up and admit mistakes engaged in more learning behavior, which went with better performance.
Studied with coworkers
In a study of more than 3,000 restaurant employees and their managers, managers’ openness to input went with employees speaking up about improvements more consistently than inspiring, visionary leadership did.
Theory
Deutsch’s theory of cooperation and competition: a conflict seen as shared tends to be resolved constructively; one seen as win-lose tends to escalate.
From practice
A widely used negotiation framework holds that agreements come more easily when people focus on their underlying interests instead of defending fixed positions.
Library last updated October 2026.