Through several different avenues—breakdowns in communication, escalation of anger and mistrust, polarization of positions and refusal to compromise, issuing ultimatums, or even avoiding conflict—negotiations can hit an impasse. Productive dialogue stops. The parties may continue talking, but the communication is usually characterized by trying to sell or force one's own position, talking about the other's unreasonable position and uncooperative behavior, or both. When these breakdowns occur, the parties may simply agree to recess, cool off, and come back tomorrow. More commonly, however, the parties break off negotiation and walk away angry and upset. Although they may privately wish there was some way to get back together, they usually don't know how to start the reconciliation.

This chapter explored various reasons that conflicts become difficult to resolve and likely to reach impasse. We discussed the fundamental nature of difficult-to-resolve conflicts and discussed four dimensions that make them difficult to resolve: the characteristics of the issues, the parties, the negotiation environment, and the negotiation setting. We then examined several common mistakes that negotiators make that result in derailed negotiations and impasses. Finally, we suggested six strategies that the parties could use to attempt to resolve a dispute on their own:

• Reach agreement on the ground rules of the negotiation.
• Reduce tension by separating themselves from one another through cooling-off periods, releasing tension, talking about emotions and feelings, or attempting to synchronize de-escalation of the conflict.
• Improve the accuracy of communication by role reversal or mirroring the other's statements.
• Keep the number of issues under control so that issues are managed effectively, new issues are not carelessly added, and large issues are divided into smaller ones.
• Search for common ground through exploring superordinate goals, identifying common enemies, using effective time management, developing common expectations through a covenant, building trust, searching for semantic solutions, and using analogical reasoning.
• Enhance the desirability of the options and alternatives for both parties by providing "yesable" proposals, asking for different decisions, sweetening offers, and using objective criteria to evaluate solutions.

The tools we discussed are broad in function and in application, and they represent self-help for negotiators in dealing with stalled or problematic exchanges. None of these methods and remedies is a panacea, and each should be chosen and applied with sensitivity to the needs and limitations of the situations and of the negotiators involved. Their successful application requires a significant amount of interpersonal communication skill. A truly confrontational breakdown, especially one that involves agreements of great impact or importance, sometimes justifies the introduction of individuals or agencies who themselves are not party to the dispute. Third-party interventions are discussed in detail in Chapter 19.