The One-Text Procedure
Refine a single draft instead of trading competing proposals
The one-text procedure shifts negotiation from competing proposals to collaborative refinement of a single draft. Instead of each side defending their position and making grudging concessions, a mediator or facilitator asks about each side's interests, prepares a draft to which no one is committed, asks for criticism, and revises the draft repeatedly until it can be improved no further. At the end, each side faces a simple yes-or-no decision on a specific package.
The procedure works because it separates inventing from deciding, reduces the number of decisions required, and prevents parties from getting locked into positions. Criticism is easier than concession: people resist making concessions but readily point out what is wrong with a draft. Each round of criticism reveals what matters most to each party without requiring them to abandon their positions.
The most famous use was at the Camp David summit in September 1978, when the United States mediated between Egypt and Israel. After thirteen days and twenty-three drafts, the mediators produced a text they recommended. Both sides accepted. The Law of the Sea negotiations and the South African constitutional process that ended apartheid also used versions of this procedure.
- Ask about interests, not positions: The mediator asks each side about their needs, not what they demand
- Criticism is easier than concession: People resist giving things up but readily say what is wrong with a draft
- No one is committed to any draft: Each version is the mediator's attempt, not anyone's position
- Reduce the number of decisions: At the end, each side faces only one decision, yes or no to the final package
- Separate inventing from deciding: The process of improving the draft is separated from the final decision to accept or reject
- Gather interests from all partiesAsk each party about their underlying interests, needs, and concerns rather than their positions. Build a comprehensive list of what matters to each side. Ask each party to criticize and improve the list of interests. The mediator makes clear they are exploring possibilities, not asking anyone to give up a position.Pro tipAsk about needs in concrete terms. Instead of asking the wife how big she wants the bay window, ask whether she wants morning sun or afternoon sun, whether the purpose is to look out or let light in.
- Prepare a first rough draftBased on the interests gathered, prepare an initial draft proposal. This is the mediator's attempt, not anyone's position. Present it with explicit dissatisfaction: 'I am not happy with this myself, but before working on it further I want your criticisms. What would be wrong with something like this?'Pro tipFrame the draft as obviously imperfect. This makes criticism feel constructive rather than adversarial and prevents anyone from feeling they must defend or attack it.
- Solicit criticism from each party separatelyAsk each party what is wrong with the draft. Do not ask them to accept or reject it. Each party will naturally raise their most important issues rather than trivial details. The criticism reveals priorities without requiring concessions.Pro tipEach round of criticism tells you what matters most. Early rounds surface major issues; later rounds address finer points. The process naturally prioritizes without anyone having to rank their interests explicitly.WarningDo not confuse soliciting criticism with asking for counterproposals. The point is to improve the single text, not to generate competing alternatives.
- Revise and repeatIncorporate the criticism into a revised draft. Return to each party with the new version and ask for further criticism. Continue through as many iterations as necessary. Use standard principles, precedent, and professional judgment to resolve remaining issues.Pro tipAt Camp David, this process went through twenty-three drafts over thirteen days. Do not rush to a final version. Each iteration surfaces new information and creative solutions.
- Present the final recommendationWhen the mediator feels the draft cannot be improved further, present it as a recommendation. Each party now has a single yes-or-no decision to make on a specific package. A yes can be contingent on the other side also saying yes.Pro tipYou do not need anyone's consent to start using this procedure. Simply prepare a draft and ask for criticism. You can change the game by starting to play a new one.
The one-text procedure was inspired by the work of Louis Sohn, whom Fisher and Ury credit as the source of the idea of using a single negotiating text. It was most dramatically employed by President Jimmy Carter's team at Camp David in 1978, where twenty-three successive drafts ultimately produced an agreement between Egypt and Israel. The approach was also used in a simplified form by diplomat Tommy Koh of Singapore during the Law of the Sea negotiations, where it helped make significant progress in an extremely complex multilateral setting.