当双方利益差距合理时可釜底抽薪当谈判陷入僵局，经过仔细分析发现双方利益

When the interest gap between the two parties is reasonable, the salary can be drawn from the bottom. <br>When the negotiation is deadlocked, after careful analysis, it is found that the interest gap between the two parties is within a reasonable range, and the other party insists that it only wants to obtain more expected benefits. Absolute the terms of cooperation, make it clear that there is no retreat, and hope that the other party will give way, otherwise he is willing to accept the breakdown of the negotiation. The premise of using this method to break through the deadlock is that the gap between the interests of the two parties does not exceed a reasonable range. Only in this way can the other party reluctantly give up part of the expected benefits and compromise to make the negotiation continue. If the gap between the interests of the two parties is too large, and unilateral efforts and concessions alone cannot make up the gap, adopting this method will only lead to the breakdown of negotiations. Therefore, this method cannot be used casually. This method is often regarded as the last option when the negotiation is deadlocked and there is really nothing to do, and the negotiation must be prepared for the breakdown of the negotiation.

When the interest gap between the two sides is reasonable, you can draw wages at the bottom of the kettle.<br>When the negotiations deadlocked, after careful analysis found that the interest gap between the two sides within a reasonable range, the other side insisted that only want to get more expected benefits, you can use the bottom of the kettle pay strategy. The conditions for cooperation will be absolute, clearly indicating that they have no way back, hope that the other side can let go, otherwise willing to accept the outcome of the breakdown of the negotiations. The premise of using this method to break the deadlock is that the gap between the interests of the two sides does not exceed a reasonable range. Only in this way, the other side will be able to bear the pain of lying off some of the expected interests, the request to make the negotiations continue. If the gap between the interests of the two sides is too great, unilateral efforts and concessions alone can not fill the gap, the use of this approach will only lead to the breakdown of negotiations. Therefore, this method cannot be used casually, often when the negotiations are deadlocked and there is nothing to do, before it is considered the last option, and it must be prepared for the idea that the negotiations will break down as a result.

When the interest gap between the two sides is reasonable, we can take the bottom line<br>When the negotiation reaches an impasse, after careful analysis, it is found that the interest gap between the two sides is within a reasonable range, and the other party insists that it only wants to obtain more expected benefits, it can adopt the strategy of taking the bottom out of the blue. Make the cooperation terms absolute, make it clear that there is no way back, and hope that the other side can make concessions, otherwise they are willing to accept the outcome of the breakdown of the negotiation. The premise of using this method to break through the deadlock is that the interest gap between the two sides does not exceed a reasonable range. Only in this way can the other party bear the pain to part of the expected interests and compromise to continue the negotiation. If the interest gap between the two sides is too large, and the gap cannot be filled by unilateral efforts and concessions, the adoption of this method will only lead to the breakdown of the negotiation. Therefore, this method can not be used casually. It is often used as the last choice when the negotiation is at an impasse and there is no way to do it. Moreover, we must be prepared for the collapse of the negotiation.<br>