Summary for people that are short on time
Written by former FBI Chief Hostage Negotiator Chris Voss, it is a book on negotiation tactics, tactical empathy and labelling in particular. It has a ton of great negotiation advice and is worth a read. It is written from the point of him as the negotiator (viewpoint man and being in the 'strong man position') and does not have female -specific strategies, which I think is a slight letdown. All in all, a fantastic book and a surprisingly light read for the content it has.
Voss introduces 11 steps or tactics to negotiation, meshed in between real life stories of him having done hostage negotiations across the globe for the FBI. Among the many strategies he explores for instance how to use Tactical Empathy (not sympathy) through emotion labelling (directly addressing emotions) and accusation auditing (neutral accusation to take out the sting out of difficult situations).
These are some of the most important tools in negotiation and, if you research Chris Voss Company (the Black Swan Group ) the tactics presented in the book are a keystone to their entire training - and really successful.
Voss stresses further building rapport, for instance by summarising your counterpart’s worldview. Using Anchors to set expectations and limit or to display anger and assertion strategically is also a recurring theme. Slightly manipulative, but effective.
My key takeaways were to calibrate questions and labelling.
A calibrated question is when you have an aggressive counterpart and ask a question in a way that they solve the problem for you. Examples used are "how am I supposed to do that? What is the biggest challenge you face?" and many more.
The book is really practical though due to the trial and error approach of the FBI cases. What really stuck with me was, for instance, to aim for a no, instead of a yes in a negotiation. This blew my mind. You might know books like Roger Fishers getting to 'Yes', that specifically want you to get a yes from the client. Voss goes the other way.
In a Negotiation, a "no" means control, a 'yes' feels like someone wants to convince you. Most sellers go for yes, yes, yes. However, if you phrase it in a way that gives the other the chance to disagree with confirming you, it gives an illusion of control. A little example is when you summarise a statement you close with, we often use is that correct so? However, bending it to "did I forget anything?" gives the power to the other person. They can affirm you with a no. You want the others to feel like they are in control, shaping the conversation in a way that it follows where you want, with the other reaching a conclusion themselves. For me, this was a mindblowing detail I never thought about before.
If you are into negotiation, I can definitely recommend this book.
Have you read it?
Leave a comment and tell us what was your takeaway