Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2-2025
Abstract
Many dispute resolution experts misunderstand the concept of BATNA (the best alternative to a negotiated agreement), believing that it is the most favorable possible outcome if the parties don’t settle. In fact, BATNA isn’t an expected result. It’s a course of action, not the value resulting from the course of action.
Attorneys often make unrealistic predictions of court outcomes because of inherent uncertainty and cognitive biases. Moreover, parties have many intangible interests that aren’t included in estimates of BATNA values.
This article offers suggestions for attorneys and mediators to advance clients’ interests by better understanding and valuing non-settlement outcomes.
Recommended Citation
John Lande,
What's the Matter With BATNA? It's Misleading and Doesn't Help Advance Parties' Important InterestsUniversity of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2025-09
(2025).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/facpubs/1258