Book Notes _ Never Split the Difference-Chris Voss
Book Notes _ Never Split the Difference-Chris Voss
by Chris Voss
The book Getting to Yes assumes that the animalistic, emotional brain
could be overcome through a rational, joint problem-solving mindset.
Chapter 2: Be a Mirror
Good negotiators expect surprises; great negotiators use their skills to
reveal the surprises they are certain exist.
The goal is to make your counterparts feel safe enough to talk about
what they want, and then move on to identify what they actually need.
Going too fast makes people feel as if they're not being heard, thereby
undermining all the rapport and trust that we've built.
When you slow the process down, you also calm it down.
It's not what we say, but how we are that is both the easiest thing to
enact and the most immediately effective mode of influence.
Repeat back the critical one to three words of what people say. Your
counterpart will elaborate on what was said and sustain the process of
connecting.
With labeling, we turn someone's feelings into words, and then very
calmly and respectfully repeat their emotions back to them.
Then label it aloud with "It seems/sounds/looks like..." Don't use "I,"
which makes you seem self-interested, and makes you take personal
responsibility for what follows.
Emotions have two levels: The "presenting" behavior you see and hear,
and the "underlying" feeling that motivates the behavior.
The faster you can label fears, the faster you can stop the swelling of
fear, and the quicker you can build feelings of safety, well-being, and
trust.
Never deny the negative; this is a crucial mistake that actually gives it
credence.
The first goal of these tools is human connection; that they might help
you extract what you want is a bonus.
"No" provides an opportunity for both parties to clarify what they don't
want, and is a safe choice that maintains the status quo.
Primal needs are urgent and illogical, and so arguing them into a
corner is just going to push your counterpart to flee with a counterfeit
yes.
Saying "no" gives the speaker the feeling of safety, security, and
control. It is a sign that the other party is engaged and thinking.
If despite all your efforts, the other party won't say "no," then they are
indecisive, confused, or have a hidden agenda. Walk away.
If your emails are being ignored, provoke a "no" with the one sentence
email: "Have you given up on this project?"
When your adversaries say "that's right," they feel they have assessed
what you've said and pronounced it as correct of their own free will.
They embrace it.
If your adversaries say "you're right," then they won't own the
conclusion. Their behavior won't change.
"You're right," like "yes," is a social lubricant that is not in any way a
substitute for real understanding between two parties.
We don't compromise because it's right, but because it's easy and we
save face. Distilled to its essence, we compromise because it's safe.
If you internalize "No deal is better than a bad deal," then your
patience can become a powerful weapon.
Deadlines cut both ways. When the negotiation is over for one side,
then it's over for the other side too.
The phrase "We just want what's fair" destabilizes the other side.
Instead of conceding irrationally, apologize, and offer to go back to
where the unfairness began and fix things.
The phrase "We've given you a fair offer" is nefarious. Mirror with
"Fair?" and label with "It seems like you're ready to provide evidence to
support that."
The phrase "I want you to feel like you're being treated fairly at all
times. Please stop me at any time if you feel like you're being treated
unfairly, and we'll address it" is empowering.
The certainty effect says that we are drawn to sure things over
probabilities, even when the probability is a better choice.
Loss aversion says that people will take greater risks to avoid losses
than to achieve gains.
Let the other side anchor monetary negotiations, since you often don't
know enough to open with confidence.
Be prepared to withstand the first offer. It could be extreme to bend
your reality, and so his following, merely absurd offer will seem
reasonable.
Anchor your counterpart high, then make your offer seem reasonable
by offering things that aren't important to you but could be important
to them.
Similarly, if their offer is low, then ask for things that matter more to
you than to them.
By selling yourself and your success as a way your boss can validate
his own intelligence and sell it to the rest of the company, he'll have a
stake in your success.
The calibrated question forces the other party to pause and actually
think about how to solve the problem.
The counterpart solves the problem, and so it gives him the illusion of
control. Additionally, there is no reciprocity involved.
Calibrated questions take the aggression out because they are subject
to interpretation by your counterpart instead of being rigidly defined.
They have the power to educate your counterpart on what the problem
is rather than causing conflict by telling them what the problem is.
Calibrated questions avoid "can," "is," "are," "do," or "does," which can
be answered with a simple "yes" or "no."
Start questions with "what" and "how." "Who," "when," and "where" will
cause your counterpart to share a fact without thinking. "Why" can
sound accusatory.
Only use "why" when the defensiveness that it creates supports the
change that you are trying to get them to see.
The question "What is the biggest challenge you face?" gets the other
side to teach you something about themselves.
This guides the other party into designing a solution that is in fact your
solution.
The first and most basic rule of keeping your emotional cool is to
figuratively bite your tongue. Pause and think.
Also, when you are verbally assaulted, do not counterattack. Instead
disarm your opponent by asking a calibrated question.
Your job isn't just to get to an agreement, but to get to one that can be
implemented and making sure that it happens.
"How" questions, correctly used, are gentle and graceful ways to say
"no" and guide your counterpart to develop a solution that's your own.
"How" questions convince them that the final solution is their idea, and
people always make more effort to implement a solution when they
think it's theirs.
"How will we know when we're on track?" and "How will we address
things if we find we're off track" push counterparts to think they're
defining success their way.
If you hear "you're right" or "I'll try," dive back in with calibrated "how"
questions until you get a "that's right."
If you want your deal implemented, you must discover and affect any
individuals who can act as deal makers or deal killers.
Beware of parties who are not directly involved but can help implement
agreements they like and block ones they don't.
The Pinocchio Effect says that liars use more words, speak in more
complex sentences, and use far more third-person pronouns.
The phrase "Your offer is very generous, but I'm sorry, that just doesn't
work for me" is a second way of saying "no."
The phrase "I'm sorry but I'm afraid I just can't do that" is a third way,
and is a little more direct.
You and your counterpart have habits of mind and behavior, and once
you identify them you can leverage them in a strategic manner.
Analysts are methodical and diligent. They are not in a big rush, and
their self-image is linked to minimizing mistakes.
Focus on what assertives have to say, because until they are convinced
you understand them, they won't listen to your point of view.
Don't assume that you are normal; this will lead to you unconsciously
projecting your style onto the other side.
The statement "I feel ___ when you ___ because ___" counteracts
unproductive statements and demands a time-out from your
counterpart.
Black Swan theory tells us that things happen that were previously
thought to be impossible, or never thought of at all.
Black Swans are events or pieces of knowledge that sit outside of our
regular expectations and therefore cannot be predicted.
When pieces don't add up it's usually because our frame of reference is
off. They only will if we break free of our expectations.
Look for inconsistencies between the other party's beliefs and actions.
To find out what they believe, simply ask and listen openly.
Positioning your demands within the worldview your counterpart uses
to make decisions shows them respect, which gets you attention and
results.
People may appear crazy if they have constraints that they are not
eager to reveal, such as not having the power to close the deal.
People complying with needs and desires you don't yet understand,
based on their own rules or worldview, may appear crazy.
Email is a bad medium for finding Black Swans: counterparts have time
to think and re-center themselves, and you can’t read non-verbal parts
of a response.
Get face time with your counterpart, and hunt for Black Swans at the
fringes and ends of meetings, where people let their guard down.
It is not the person across the table who scares us, but conflict itself.
We overwhelmingly resort to flight in fight-or-flight.
Chris Voss, a former FBI hostage negotiator, offers several key pieces of
advice for effective negotiation:
Active Listening: Pay close attention to what the other party is saying to
gather valuable information.
Mirroring: Repeat the last few words the other person has said to build
rapport and encourage them to elaborate.
Labelling Emotion: Identify and vocalize the emotions of the other party to
make them feel heard and understood.
Use Silence: After making a point or asking a question, use silence to prompt
the other party to respond more fully.
"That's Right!": Aim to get the other party to say "That's right!" which
indicates they feel understood and validated.
The book should have been titled "Start at No in Negotiations." Often, a "no"
means "wait" or "I'm not comfortable with that." Probe deeper and listen
carefully to uncover key information behind the "no" (such as "I want to but I
don't have the money now" or "it is actually my spouse, not me, who doesn't
agree"). This is a much more effective approach than trying to get the
counterpart to say "yes," which the person might say just to get rid of you.
The author, who is a former FBI hostage negotiator, included too many
hostage stories. These situations where lives are on the line, the negotiator
would never split the difference (e.g., you take 2 hostages and I take 2
hostages) and hence, the book title. But for everyday situations (like
negotiating with a family member, buying a car, or working with colleagues),
the stories aren't that useful and such a perspective on negotiations isn't
practical.
Then start from the beginning and practice the skills, including:
Mirror - repeat the last three words (or the critical one to three words) of
what someone has just said to draw out more information from the person
Label - validate someone's emotions and fears by acknowledging it (such as
"it seems like you feel you're not being appreciated")
Accusation List - list the worst things the counterpart could say about you
(such as "you probably think I don't spend enough time on this project") and
give statements to alleviate that concern (such as "You can trust me to do
my part without supervision" and "we all want this project to be successful").
Ask questions, collect information, and consider creative ways to get to your
goals (such as non-monetary items - amenities, upgrades, positive reviews,
and referrals). There is much more in the book that goes through the
nuances of what to say, how to say it, and how to behave. It is a book that
you need to read slowly, take notes, and practice the tips before moving on
to the next chapter.
I was taught all the BATNA and rational negotiations strategies in law school,
but all those assumptions were based on rationality and lack of feelings. But
we now understand that we are more prone to emotional decision making
(system 1 or the elephant) as opposed to cool headed reasoned thinking
(system 2 and the rider). So this book helps you negotiate (or maybe
manipulate?) with our emotional reptilian brains. And to watch out for your
own fallacies as well.
It breaks things down into simple concepts, but shows it takes practice to
hone the skills (obviously, otherwise I'd be sauntering into that lead FBI
negotiator position myself). Why should we start our questions with "what"
and "how"? Why do we want the other guy to say no? When is it helpful to
use the late night FM DJ voice vs. the chipper, friendly voice? I know the
answers now. And they make a hecka-lotta sense.
* There are three "voices" you typically want to use in a negotiation. The first
voice, and the one you should use by default, is your positive/playful voice:
the voice of an easygoing, good-natured person, that is light and
encouraging; relax and smile. The second is the late night radio DJ voice:
low, smooth, calm, and showing that (a) you're relaxed and confident
because (b) you are in control. And the third is the direct/assertive voice,
similar to a drill sergeant. You very rarely use the third one.
* Mirroring: repeat back to the person the last thing they said, or the most
important few words in their last sentence, but use voice intonation to
indicate that you want them to expand on that topic—that you're seeking
clarification. It gets them to do more talking and feel heard. It gives you
more information.
* Call out the negative: list all the other person's charges against you up
front. Call out all their fears, grievances, and problems, acknowledge them,
respond to them, and then invite the other person to add to it. Then, _listen_,
and don't judge. Instead, as the person adds other items, label each negative
emotion, acknowledge it, and find a way to turn it into something positive.
For example: "It seems like you're concerned that we're a small, relatively
unknown company, and what happens if we suddenly go out of business or
get acquired? Will you be left hanging? I think this is a valid concern, but the
advantage of working with a small company is that we can move much
faster, and our license ensures that if we disappear, you're going to be fine
because of [...]." Get the barriers that block progress into the open as soon
as possible so you can deal with them pro-actively.
* Loss aversion: convince the other side they have something to lose if they
don’t sign (and not only something win if they do sign). Humans are loss
averse, fearing loss significantly more than valuing wins, so showing them
what they lose can often be a bigger motivator than showing them what they
gain.
* Anchors: start off the bidding (yes, you can say the first number!) with an
extreme value to "anchor" the negotiation towards the range that favors you.
E.g., Offer just 50% of the asking price as the first bid. You can also use
ranges to your advantage, with the actual number you want at one end, and
your extreme bid at the other: e.g., offer a range of 50-75% of the asking
price, with your desired price being at 75%. This can be even more effective
if you bring up ranges from external data: e.g., "At company X they pay
$YYY-$ZZZ for this role." This way, the conversation isn't just about you or
your own greed/needs, but about market conditions.
* Asymmetry: look for asymmetric trade-offs, such as something the other
person can toss in that's cheap for them, but highly valuable for you. In most
cases, money is valued equally, so this means looking for non-monetary
terms. E.g., If you're a consultant negotiating with a law firm, you might be
able to get them to mention you in their next journal/publication, which is
cheap for them, but incredibly valuable marketing for you.
Use these sorts of questions to guide the conversation. The responder will
actually end up doing most of the talking, so they'll feel like they are in
control (they'll also feel more committed to the solution, as they will be
actively helping to come up with it!), but you're actually guiding them, and
forcing them to see things your way. After all, by answering your calibrated
questions, they have to make your obstacles theirs and come up with a
solution—YOUR solution.
A few notes: (a) The question you ask must be *open ended*; it' can't be a
yes/no question or a quick factual question, otherwise, they'll answer without
thinking, and expect something in return. (b) Don't accuse the person or
attack them in the form of a question; instead, guide them to think through
the blockers for you. (c) Most of the questions should be "what" and "how"
questions; why is often accusatory, so you probably want to avoid it.
Examples:
* Aim to not only get a "yes," but also a "how." The how is the
implementation. If you just get a "yes," but no implementation details, then
you may still fail. Use calibrated questions to ferret out the how. E.g., How
am I supposed to do that? How will we know we’re on track? How will we
address things if we find we’re off track? How does this affect the rest of your
team? How on board are the people not on this call? What do your colleagues
see as their main challenges in this area?
* Backup listener: someone who joins negotiations just to listen. Their job is
to listen between the lines while the other person talks. When you're the
active participant, you'll often miss critical cues that a backup listener can
spot.
* Slow down. Most people go way too fast, but if you go too fast, the other
person won’t feel like they are being heard.
* Strategy for dealing with a "bulldog" who tries to aggressively roll over you:
(a) Use your late night radio DJ voice. (b) Say "sorry": e.g., I'm sorry you're
feeling so much pressure. (c) Mirror: make it clear you're seeking
clarification. The other person will repeat their message, but in different
words, perhaps calmer. (d) Listen silently. (e) Repeat. If you do this over and
over, the other person will quickly calm down. If you are being attacked, slow
down, pause, count to 10 if you have to: the goal is to let your emotions
settle. Then use the previous steps and calibrated questions.
* Look for a "that’s right!" from the other person. If you can get them to say
"that's right!" it means you've finally understood them and they know it. One
way to get that is to present a summary of what you understand to be that
person's goals/needs/position. If you get it right, the person will agree—and
they'll agree with you without feeling like they are "giving in." But it's an
agreement and it makes them feel understood, which is huge. Note that
while "that's right!" is very valuable, "you're right" is often a disaster. It's not
about you; it's about them and their needs.
* Haggling techniques: (a) Figure out your target price. (b) Begin your
bidding at around 65% of your target price; then go to 85%, 95%, 100%. The
first jump seems really big, and each jump after that is smaller and smaller
to make it feel like you're approaching your absolute ceiling. (c) Use non-
round numbers; instead of offering $500, offer $512.32, as it makes it seem
like you did an exact calculation, and that's truly your ceiling. (d) As they
make counter-offers, use calibrated questions to have the person bid against
themselves: "Thank you for your generous offer. I wish I could, but I just can't
do that. How could I ?"
* In a negotiation, the other part is NOT your enemy; not even in a hostage
negotiation, let alone when negotiating salaries. The only enemy is the
situation; the other person you're negotiating with is actually your partner in
navigating this situation.
* Hopes and dreams: Visualize what the other person wants out of life, and
try to use those aspirations to persuade them. Display a passion for what
that person wants and lay out a plan for getting them there. Draw a roadmap
for how that person can achieve their dreams—change their perception of
what's possible—and you will succeed.
Phew. That's a lot of useful advice. Perhaps that's the biggest gotcha with the
book: there's so much here that it's hard to know how to put it all together. I
guess that's where practice comes in!
“'Yes' and 'Maybe' are often worthless. But 'No' always alters the
conversation.”
“Negotiation is the art of letting the other side have your way.”
Voss explains how to negotiate--not just for the FBI, but in any realm of life.
So much of his advice sounds completely anti-intuitive. Just as an example,
one should not be encouraged by the answer "Yes". It is much better to hear
the answer "No". Why? A "Yes" means that your counterpart just wants to get
rid of you. A "No" means that he is thinking for himself. You want to pose a
question that gets a "No" response, but in a positive way. For example, "Do
you want to give up on any chance of making a deal?" would be properly
answered by "No", which means that your counterpart is thinking on his own,
and not pressured to answer "Yes".
My learnings in the book fell into two main buckets:
After all the praise, I’d like to offer a fair warning to future readers. Most
strategies, and especially those relying on specific wording, are heavily
dependent on the negotiation happening in the U.S. or in a similar enough
culture. For example, both verbatim translations of “How am I supposed to
do that?” and the general message sound ridiculous in Bulgarian. Another,
similar example is trying to use the “I can't afford this” strategy – the other
side shamed me for being poor :-) That said, I found the general framework
to be universally applicable.
This is by far the best book on negotiation I've ever read and newly entered
into my top reads list. Never split the difference takes conventional thinking
that negotiating is logical, is about "getting to yes" and "splitting the
difference" to get achieve a "win-win" situation, then flips that thinking on
it's head. The author frames negotiation as two parties working collaborating
where the situation is the adversary - what a great way to approach a
negotiation. The author stresses the importance of genuine empathy in a
negotiation. As a consumer, father and professional salesperson, this book is
invaluable. My key takeaways:
-When disagreeing with someone's point of view, say "sorry: repeat back to
them what they said in a radio voice and then they should be able to give
you some additional clarity. If more clarity is needed, repeat
-Use labeling to disarm someone and generate trust during a disagreement,
for example: "it looks as though you want to do the following" "it looks as
though you feel the following way"
-Accusation audit (a form of anchoring): say upfront the worst case scenario /
harshly self-critique for example I'm going to sound like an a****** and then
say the statement, they will be more sympathetic and less likely to think you
are an a****** as a result
-Don't be afraid of no. No is the start of a negotiation it makes people feel
calm and in control so give them the chance to do so. Allow them to respond
to no and work towards getting the "that's right" you seek
-Empathy doesn't mean you necessarily agree with the other person it
means you're trying to understand their point of view
-Asking questions you know will result in a no answer are very productive for
example ask "what will you say no to today?"
-To get a response when someone is ignoring your emails ask them "have
you given up on this project?"
-A summary is labeling and paraphrasing
-Successful negotiations result in getting to "that's right" not to "you're
right". It's about correctly understanding the other person's point of view and
situation
-Contrary to popular belief you get a better deal when both parties know
your deadline
-We are all irrational and we are all emotional
-Use calibrated questions to collect information that start with what and how
never use why which is accusatory
-Repeatedly asking calibrated open how questions is a way to say no without
making others feel like they've lost control
-The objective is not to get others to say "yes" it's to get them to say "that's
right" keep asking calibrated questions until they say "that's right"
-To understand who all the decision-makers are, ask open questions like "how
does this affect the rest of the team?" "who else will be affected by this?"
"how do others feel about this?"
-To avoid getting a false yes, have them say yes three times in three different
ways using calibrated questions
-Using your first name humanizes the discussion. Funny example I'm going to
try for getting a discount at a store by saying "hi my name is Jeff what's the
Jeff discount"
-There are four ways to say no: ask "how can I do that"; "your offer is very
generous but I just cannot do that"'; gently say no (need to re-listen to
remember the 4th)
-A bargaining technique is to offer 65% of what you willing to pay (extreme
anchor) then 85 then 95 then 100 and make sure to emphasize along the
way
-At every negotiation there should be three black swans: a piece of
information that is previously unknown and instrumental to the negotiation
-To uncover black swans in a meeting have a second person join you both of
you take notes compare notes afterwards and also look between the lines
-Uncover the other person's unobtained goals and charter a plan for them to
achieve them