🧑💼 Management, HR & internal negotiation
In-company negotiation
Internal, managerial and labour negotiation: D. Lax & J. Sebenius ("3-D Negotiation"), D. Malhotra & M. Bazerman, G. R. Shell; French labour framework (settlement agreement, mandatory annual bargaining).
Full detail in the “Origin & history” section below.
Author of the library
Negotiation lecturer at KEDGE Business School
A rare threefold background serving negotiation: teaching, commercial justice and audit, backed by experience as a company director in Bordeaux.
Negotiating remote work and internal mobility consists of turning an individual request for an arrangement (days working remotely, change of role, geographic relocation) into a balanced agreement grounded in the reciprocal interests of employer and employee. Rather than pitting the employee's flexibility against the company's productivity, it seeks options for mutual gain: engagement, retention and performance in exchange for autonomy, quality of life and development. It rests on the French legal framework (Labour Code, the télétravail national interprofessional agreement (ANI télétravail) of 26 November 2020) and on the principles of principled negotiation. It is an internal, recurring and relational negotiation, where the agreement must remain sustainable over time.
At a glance
Vigilance: moderate (4.0/10) · Preparation required: 7/10
Indicative profile: it situates the “Management, HR & internal negotiation” family as the Management, HR & internal negotiation school practises it, not this technique taken in isolation. Techniques from the same family and school therefore share the same profile. NEGOCOACH editorial rating out of 10, non-experimental · the higher the “relational risk” value, the more costly the technique is to the relationship.
NEGOCOACH assessment
Tactical potential 6.0/10 (effectiveness, impact, discretion) and vigilance moderate (relational and ethical risk): two distinct readings, deliberately never merged into a single score that would reward risk. NEGOCOACH editorial rating calibrated from the “Management, HR & internal negotiation” family and the “Management, HR & internal negotiation” school. Each criterion is rated out of 10; click to understand what it measures.
How far the technique can carry the negotiation in the intended direction when it is well executed.
Strength of the effect produced on the counterpart's perceptions, emotions and decisions.
How hard it is for the other party to notice the technique is being used. A high value = very discreet.
The information, analysis and rehearsal required upfront to use it effectively.
Potential cost to the relationship and to trust if the technique is spotted, refused or fails. A high value = riskier.
Moral acceptability: fairness, transparency and respect for the counterpart's autonomy. A high value = more defensible.
Documented school
The school this technique stems from is documented by recognised work and established practice, without experimental consensus. This indicator qualifies the school, not this technique taken in isolation.
Indicative NEGOCOACH editorial rating, for teaching purposes. For “Relational risk”, a high value signals a cost to the relationship, not a quality.
The technique cannot be attributed to a single author: it combines three lineages. The interest-based principled negotiation of Roger Fisher and William Ury (Harvard Negotiation Project, "Getting to Yes", 1981) provides the logic of mutual-gain options. Denise M. Rousseau's work on "i-deals" (idiosyncratic deals, 2005) theorizes the individual and legitimate negotiation of tailored work arrangements between an employee and their employer. Finally, the French framework is structured by the national interprofessional agreement of 26 November 2020 on the successful implementation of remote work, which makes social dialogue the tool for reconciling employer and employee interests.
An internal negotiation process, individual or collective, aimed at defining the terms of work organization (number and rhythm of remote days, availability windows, coverage of expenses, reversibility) and of mobility (change of role, department or site, geographic relocation) by explicitly articulating the interests of the employer (continuity of service, team cohesion, control, costs) and those of the employee (autonomy, work-life balance, career development, reduced commuting). It rests on the formalization of a revisable agreement (contract amendment, charter, collective agreement) and on objective criteria rather than on a positional balance of power.
Application by context
A field sales representative negotiates being based remotely from their regional home in exchange for a commitment to increased field coverage, the company gaining in customer proximity and in reduced travel costs to headquarters.
A buyer negotiates with their management a hybrid role allowing them to follow international suppliers remotely across their time zones, in exchange for extended availability that improves the responsiveness of tender processes.
During a company-level collective bargaining, the trade unions and management arbitrate the number of remote-eligible days, the coverage of expenses and the guarantees of the right to disconnect, each seeking to reconcile flexibility and collective cohesion.
During a crisis (pandemic, an incident blocking a site), negotiating a mass switch to remote work becomes a lever for business continuity, where urgency pushes for rapid agreements that one takes care to keep temporary and revisable.
In a local authority, a territorial manager negotiates an internal move to a remote-eligible department relying on objective criteria of competence and seniority, to avoid any suspicion of favouritism and secure the executive's decision.
A company negotiates with its employees a reduction in office space in return for expanded remote work, turning the rent savings into benefits (home equipment, mobility allowance) shared between the parties.
In a multicultural team spread across several countries, negotiating remote-work rules integrates the divergent cultural expectations regarding office presence, seeking a common base respectful of local sensitivities.
A parent negotiates with their employer remote-work days aligned with childcare, demonstrating that the arrangement stabilizes their engagement and reduces their absenteeism risk, a reciprocal benefit rather than a unilateral favour.
Counter-techniques
Negotiation is also played on defence. Here is how to recognise this technique when it is used against you, and turn it around.
The signals that give it away
The counters that defuse it
Turn it into an advantage
Name the manoeuvre: said out loud, a technique loses most of its power.
Reacting emotionally instead of coming back to the facts.
Strengths: it broadens the range of solutions (remote work and mobility create value at low marginal cost), strengthens engagement and retention, and shifts the debate from positions to interests, which preserves the durable employer-employee relationship. It enables tailored arrangements (i-deals) suited to each situation. Weaknesses: risk of perceived inequity between employees ("why them and not me?"), difficulty in objectively measuring remote performance, a power asymmetry unfavourable to the isolated employee facing the employer, and the fragility of informal, unformalized agreements. Individual arrangements can also erode collective cohesion and bypass social dialogue.
Favourable when the relationship is meant to last and both parties have an interest in preserving it (scarce talent, high replacement cost), when the role is objectively "remote-eligible" or the mobility feasible, and when a reference framework exists (charter, industry-wide agreement, ANI). Relevant amid recruitment/retention tensions, during real-estate reorganizations, or in the face of a legitimate personal constraint of the employee (health, parenting, caregiving, distance). Less suited when the role requires irreducible physical presence, when managerial trust is absent, or when collective equity precludes any individual treatment.
Business · The télétravail national agreement of 26 November 2020: social dialogue as reconciler of interests, In autumn 2020, after the forced generalization of remote work brought about by the health crisis, the French social partners (employer organizations and trade unions) negotiated for three weeks the national interprofessional agreement signed on 26 November 2020 on the "successful implementation of remote work". Rather than imposing new obligations, the agreement sets out a non-binding reference framework and makes social dialogue at company level (and even industry level) the instrument for reconciling the interests of the employer (organization, continuity, costs) and those of employees (voluntariness, coverage of expenses, right to disconnect). It illustrates the shift from a balance of power to an interest-based negotiation, where the agreement is designed to be adapted and applied locally.
Everyday life · Representative scenario: from "I demand" to shared interest, Representative scenario (unattributed). An employee requests three remote-work days after a move that brings her commute to two hours a day. Her manager, at first on a position ("the internal rule is one day"), reframes in terms of interests: the employee seeks to reduce fatigue and transport costs and to stay with the company; the employer wants to preserve attendance at team meetings and responsiveness. They build a mutual-gain option: two remote days with guaranteed presence on Tuesdays (meeting) and Thursdays (client review), measurable quarterly objectives, a reversibility clause at six months. The agreement, formalized by a contract amendment, holds because it partially satisfies both parties and remains revisable.
Facing an interlocutor who digs into a rigid position, you recognize it by reframing it as a question of interest ("what would that extra day allow you to obtain?") to reopen the range of options. To defend against unilateral pressure from the employer (an imposed return to the office without justification), you ask for the objective criteria and the operational rationale, you invoke the reference framework (agreement, charter, ANI, equal treatment) and you propose a reversible trial period rather than a frontal refusal. Facing an employee who presents their request as an acquired right, you recall its negotiated, revisable nature, conditioned on verifiable counterparts.
Limits: the individual negotiation of remote work runs up against the power asymmetry (the isolated employee carries little weight), the risk of indirect discrimination (i-deals often benefit already-favoured profiles or the best negotiators) and the difficulty of equity between remote-eligible and non-eligible roles. Ethics: the employer must guarantee voluntariness, non-discrimination, coverage of expenses and the right to disconnect; they must not trade an arrangement against a waiver of rights, nor use remote work as a tool of intrusive surveillance. Transparency about the criteria for granting arrangements is a requirement of organizational justice.
Related techniques: interest-based principled negotiation (Fisher & Ury) and the search for mutual-gain options ("enlarging the pie"); i-deals or idiosyncratic arrangements (Rousseau); collective bargaining of company and industry agreements (social dialogue); the package deal / differential-value exchange (trading what costs little to one for what is worth much to the other); the reversible trial clause and step-by-step negotiation; the negotiation of internal mobility and the sustainable mobility allowance.
Quick exercise
Answer in your head, then reveal the solution. Memory is built through active recall.
Frequently asked questions
Negotiating remote work and internal mobility consists of turning an individual request for an arrangement (days working remotely, change of role, geographic relocation) into a balanced agreement grounded in the reciprocal interests of employer and employee. Rather than pitting the employee's flexibility against the company's productivity, it seeks options for mutual gain: engagement, retention and performance in exchange for autonomy, quality of life and development. It rests on the French legal framework (Labour Code, the télétravail national interprofessional agreement (ANI télétravail) of 26 November 2020) and on the principles of principled negotiation. It is an internal, recurring and relational negotiation, where the agreement must remain sustainable over time.
Yes. Used in good faith it stays within a fair negotiation: it structures the exchange without deceiving the other party. Being transparent about your intentions strengthens the long-term relationship.
Reacting emotionally instead of coming back to the facts. The right reflex: slow down and reformulate.
NEGOCOACH does not assess the experimental validation of this technique in isolation. What we document is the grounding of its source school (Management, HR & internal negotiation): documented school. Full detail is in the "At a glance" section of this page.
Practise with AI
Copy, paste into your assistant, replace the [brackets]. Works with ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Mistral, Perplexity.
Build your plan before the meeting
You are an expert negotiation coach. Help me prepare to use the "Negotiating Remote Work and Mobility" technique in the following situation: [describe your situation]. Give me: the conditions for success, a 3-step script, my counterpart's likely objections and how to answer them.
Rehearse against an AI counterpart
Play the role of my counterpart in a negotiation. I am going to test the "Negotiating Remote Work and Mobility" technique. React realistically and with resistance, do not give in too quickly, then at the end analyse my performance and suggest 3 concrete improvements.
Analyse a past negotiation
Here is how my negotiation went: [paste the exchanges]. Analyse whether the "Negotiating Remote Work and Mobility" technique was used well, what worked, the mistakes made, and spell out precisely what I could have done better.
References
Founding works of the 🧑💼 Management, HR & internal negotiation school this technique belongs to.
3-D Negotiation
BookD. Lax & J. Sebenius · 2006
Negotiation Genius
BookD. Malhotra & M. Bazerman · 2007
Bargaining for Advantage
BookG. R. Shell · 2006
Getting to Yes
BookR. Fisher & W. Ury · 1981
Internal, managerial and labour negotiation: D. Lax & J. Sebenius ("3-D Negotiation"), D. Malhotra & M. Bazerman, G. R. Shell; French labour framework (settlement agreement, mandatory annual bargaining).
On video
Videos to picture Negotiating Remote Work and Mobility and anchor it through examples.
A verified video selection is being enriched; the search above already surfaces the best videos on the topic.
Technique map
Every technique sits within a network: what it draws on, what it combines with, where it applies, and how to defend against it.
Spot its signals, neutralise it and turn it around with the defensive playbook on this page.
See the counter-techniquesNegotiating remote work and internal mobility consists of turning an individual request for an arrangement (days working remotely, change of role, geographic relocation) into a balanced agreement grounded in the reciprocal interests of employer and employee. Rather than pitting the employee's flexibility against the company's productivity, it seeks options for mutual gain: engagement, retention and performance in exchange for autonomy, quality of life and development. It rests on the French legal framework (Labour Code, the télétravail national interprofessional agreement (ANI télétravail) of 26 November 2020) and on the principles of principled negotiation. It is an internal, recurring and relational negotiation, where the agreement must remain sustainable over time.
Name the manoeuvre: said out loud, a technique loses most of its power.
Reacting emotionally instead of coming back to the facts.
Our programmes turn theory into a concrete advantage.