Never Split the Difference

Chris Voss

1/5

"I didn't like it"

Review

We negotiate on a daily basis. Practically any time a decision is made amongst more than one person, a negotiation was done— sometimes mentally, or nonverbally. Sometimes, those negotiations are foreknown and prepared for— hopefully the last time you bought a car, you walked in with a plan. If you didn’t, then you definitely know the value of negotiation skills. But often times, we walk into a negotiation drastically underprepared, or unaware it’s even happening— especially in our relationships with others. I believe that negotiation is a skill that can be learned and improved, and I believe this book is helpful for exactly that.

Unfortunately, Never Split the Difference ended up being a lot less practical than I wanted. It was interesting to read some of the stories Chris Voss told from his career as an FBI hostage negotiator, and certainly there’s some practical advice in this book, but overall I was left unimpressed.

I was wondering if this book is just another pop-psych book, but thankfully, Voss clearly states on one page that “this is not another pop-psych book.” Thanks, Chris!

If you’re gunning for a professional negotiator position, definitely read this book! It has some really helpful tips for that level of “official” negotiation. If you’re a high level executive in a business and frequently negotiate with clients, you should probably read this book. And if you don’t fit into those categories, then, well… don’t worry about it. Read a summary if you want.

Ethics

In life, “getting what I want” is a frequently helpful goal, but not always the morally correct one. Especially in personal relationships with friends and family, I think it’s important to be wary of, and avoid, manipulation techniques. The title of the book, “Never Split the Difference”, is only one tactic the author discusses, but it’s already a red flag for empathetic communication. If you choose to employ the strategies in this book, I hope you do so carefully, and in the right context. In one sentence, Voss claims these techniques are “relationship-affirming.” I don’t believe that’s always true.

• …in this book, I… help you disarm, redirect, and dismantle your counterpart in virtually any negotiation. And to do so in a relationship-affirming way.

• …many people shy away from [these techniques] because they seem manipulative… let me just say these tools are used by all the best negotiators because they simply recognize the human psyche for what it is. We are emotional, irrational beasts who are emotional and irrational in predictable, pattern-filled ways. Using that knowledge is only, well, rational.

Takeaways

• Humans are very often emotional and irrational.
• The best negotiators empathize with their opponent— they understand the other person’s ideas, motivations, desires, and identity.
• Asking tactical questions like “How am I supposed to do that?” helps create empathy in the other person, and brings them to your perspective.

Notes

• It all starts with the universally applicable premise that people want to be understood and accepted. Listening is the cheapest, yet most effective concession we can make to get there.

• Voss says that empathy is: “the ability to recognize the perspective of a counterpart, and the vocalization of that recognition… notice I didn’t say anything about agreeing with the other person’s values and beliefs…”

  • Tactical empathy is one step further: it’s understanding the feelings, and “also hearing what is behind those feelings, so you can increase your influence”

  • Most of us enter verbal combat unlikely to persuade anyone of anything because we only know and care about our own goals and perspective.

  • You want the other person to say “that’s right!” and you never hear them say “you’re right”.

• Crisis negotiation teams didn’t really exist until an airplane hostage accident in 1975, after which the court ruled that “a reasonable attempt at negotiations must be made prior to a tactical intervention.”

• Regarding the famous book Getting to Yes from the late 1900s, Voss still agrees with “many of the powerful bargaining strategies”, but the book (and our culture in general, to this day) overstates the “rationality” of human beings.

Negotiation Tactics

• Labeling is a tactic where you validate someone’s emotion by acknowledging it, and giving it a name. It helps show that you know how the person feels.

  • Labeling is a form of “grounding”— it helps move your brain from emotional to rational.
  • Acknowledging someone’s negative thoughts about you/the situation can be very disarming.

• Using “No"

  • "No” is an affirmation of autonomy.

  • People need to feel in control. When you preserve a person’s autonomy by clearly giving them permission to say “No” to your ideas, the emotions calm, the effectiveness of the decisions go up, and the other party can really look at your proposal.

  • Using your skills to create… agreement… is useful, but ultimately that connection is useless unless the other person feels they are equally as responsible, if not solely responsible, for creating… the new idea they have.

  • Everyone wants to feel that they are in control; to negotiate, you have to play into the other person’s desires, from their perspective.
  • Voss recommends you get to “no” early in the conversation, to make the other person feel like they’re in control.
    • This is in stark contrast to popular advice for sales. Salesmen often use targeted “yes” questions like “do you hate mosquitos?” which lead to defensiveness.

• Voss advises against compromising.

  • His definition of “compromise” is splitting the difference.

  • I’m here to call bullshit on compromise right now. We don’t compromise because it’s right; we compromise because it is easy and because it saves face. We compromise in order to say that at least we got half the pie… we compromise to be safe.

• Calibrated questions

  • The implication of any well-designed calibrated question is that you want what the other guy wants but you need his intelligence to overcome the problem… you’ve not only implicitly asked for help— triggering goodwill and less defensiveness— but you’ve engineered a situation in which your formerly recalcitrant counterpart is now using his mental and emotional resources to overcome your challenges. It is the first step in your counterpart internalizing your way— and the obstacles in it— as his own. And that guides the other party toward designing a solution. Your solution.

  • ”How” questions:
    • Keep the counterpart engaged
    • Wastes their time while you can gather information, plan, etc.
    • Leads the counterpart to contemplate your problems
    • Is a gentle way of saying “no”
    • Ex. “You must give me $1,000,000 tonight or your brother dies.” -> “How am I supposed to do that?"

• "Why?” makes people defensive. Avoid it.

• Voss recommends the Ackerman Method for negotiations:

  • This method uses calculated raises and strategies to make your counterpart feel like they squeezed everything out of you and “won”.
  1. Set your target price (your goal).
  2. Set your first offer at 65% of your target price.
  3. Calculate 3 raises of decreasing increments (specifically, 85%, 95%, 100%)
  4. Use lots of empathy and different ways of saying “No” to get to the other side to counter before you increase your offer.
  5. When calculating the final amount, use precise, nonround numbers (like $37,893 instead of $38,000). It gives the number credibility and weight.
  6. On your final number, throw in a nonmonetary item to show you’re at your limit.

• The similarity principle

  • We trust people more when we view them as being similar or familiar. People trust those who are in their in-group. Belonging is a primal instinct. And if you can trigger that instinct, that sense that “Oh, we see the world the same way,” then you immediately gain influence.

• 7% of a message is based on the words, 38% comes from the tone of voice, and 55% from the speaker’s body language and face.

  • To me personally, these sound like bullshit statistics. What does “7% of a message” even mean? Alas, Voss claims these statistics are from a UCLA professor and 2 “famous studies”.

• When you want to counteract unproductive statements from your counterpart, you can say “I feel ____ when you ____ because ____”, and that demands a time-out from the other person.