Never Split the Difference by Chris Voss

Negotation is the art of letting someone else have your way

I've heard about this book over the last years here and there. What made me read it was the hearing its critique of Best Alternative to Negotiated Offer (BATNA), which was the only thing I knew about negotiation theory after having read Getting to Yes and some articles like patio11's guide to salary negotiation. Also, my last salary negotation went terribly and I'm getting to remedy some of that in my next salary negotation where I will have a much worse BATNA as I now want a raise in my current job, not a new job.

Overall, I found the book well-written and easy to read. I like concrete examples and there are a lot in the book, ranging from hostage negotiations to more standard negotiations about salaries, used cars and closing deals.

I didn't like the techniques that seem manipulative, like always using non-round numbers and Ackerman bargaining when negotiating about money. It strikes me as too obvious and I worry it quickly backfires if the other side catches on, but I will test them out. The idea behind Ackerman bargaining does make sense, even if the numbers look a bit extreme for something like salary negotations, but the idea of reducing the steps progressively and establishing an extreme anchor make sense compared to the classic meet in the middle negotiation.

The rest of the techniques seems more genuine. In the end, the goal is to try and make your counterpart negotiate with themselves and to keep focusing on the issue, which is easier said than done. This is why it is important to stay open and trying to understand what the real issue is and what the hidden constraints are. One example of this is the different kind of yes'es. I might feel good if I walk out of a negotiation with a "yes", but it doesn't matter if the "yes" was a response to being bulldozed or even a desire to please. What you want is that your counterpart says "that's right"; not a hesitant "yes".

The most important technique is the calibrated question. The main example is "How am I supposed to that?". Done correctly, it puts your counterpart into your shoes and makes them want to solve your problems. The opposite to the calibrated question is asking "why?". This usually comes across as an accusation and it puts your counterpart into a defensive position. I have often observed that in myself and others as well. There is no better way to make a discussion tense and aggressive. On the other hand, that is sometimes what you want to do. A "why" delivered in an upbeat way can be a powerful tool, especially when managing upwards.

Another interesting technique is the accusation audit. Eminem in the final battle of 8 mile shows you how to don it. You pre-empt your counterparty's arguments. When I ask my boss for a raise, I can start that by referring to negative feedback I have gotten or other mistakes that might have been made recently.

There is also a section on different personality types: the assertive, the analytical and the accommodator. I'm probably a mix of assertive and analytical, but leaning heavily towards analytical. That means that my main pitfall is being too analytical and thinking that a rational argument wins. This means that you might miss key information during the negotiation. Maybe my counterparty really wants to close this deal by the end of this week (to meet his quota or maybe get leverage in another negotation) and is willing to pay a lot more. If I uncover this information that can change the whole negotiation. The assertive part means that I might focus too much on my own goals instead of the issue at hand, and one might make the other side defensive.

Overall, it is a quick read with some ideas and techniques that seem helpful. I like the mindset that no deal is worse than a bad one. The book also seems honest as it admits that none of these techniques work unless you have the right delivery. "How am I supposed to that?" comes over very differently when said in a passive-aggressive or sarcastic manner instead of an upbeat manner where it comes across that you want to solve this problem together. It also focuses being realistic. It is good to aim high, but your goals should be reasonable. If I'm a good performer I might get a salary that's 20-30% higher than my peers, but negotiation techniques won't get me there if my manager thinks I'm the worst performer in my team.

It will be interesting to try out some of these tips going forward. The main negotation coming up is salary, but I also want to see if it can make me better when negotiating for resources, discussing timelines and prioritizing work.

When the pressure is on you don't rise to occasion - you fall to your highest level of preparation