not possible for either side to win except at the expense of the other. However, the most effective negotiations arise when each side focuses on the motivations of the other side -- why they want the things that they say that they want. Looked at this way negotiation problems become less positional and are more likely to yield more than one answer. Government has a reassurance need to cut spending. Union members may have a range of needs from security to desperation to simple recognition of the value of the role that they and their members play. There may be several ways of reconciling these needs which the top-down imposition of a simple pay freeze may not achieve. If exploring these underlying motivations is done collaboratively it can generate a range of solutions. Re-framing the issue as "how do we ensure the highest level of public services we can afford and protect the most jobs we can afford for the next generation" enables the underlying motivations on both sides to be captured, invites the problem to be shared and encourages both parties to find answers to the problem. "Joining" behaviours like "sharing problems" and "sharing solutions" can be a very effective choice of tactic when bargaining in these circumstances. These behaviours also improve the climate of the negotiation. They also increase the chances of both sides being committed to the outcome, because they helped to create it -- this is far more likely to happen than if one side simply