Bargain Hard — “Never Split the Difference” Chapter 9 Summary
You’re nailing the negotiation. You have built sufficient rapport, surfaced and resolved any underlying worries, your counterpart is in tune with you.
Now you need to bargain the final number and, if done right, get the number you want.
The Three Negotiation Types
The bargaining exchange itself is tough. It’s anxiety-provoking, can generate unnecessary aggression, and can be easily fumbled.
For starters, people are not made equal in how they approach bargaining, or negotiation in general. There are three major negotiation types and Chris details them in the book.
Before moving on, please be conscious there isn’t a winner type. The point to understand these types is to understand your own type, and how it plays with the other types when you sit across them on a negotiation. Your approach must be nuanced depending on who is sitting opposite from you.
And remember, people are not a static negotiation type. They have a predominant type, but good negotiators will know to borrow traits from the other two types to enhance their strategies. You add traits to increase your strengths at the bargaining table.
Analyst
Analysts are methodical and intelligent. They work towards the best result systematically, without too much worry for time. They work to minimize mistakes and surprises with lots of preparation ahead of time.
Analysts are thorough, and rarely show emotion nor deviate from their goals. Their speech will often come across as cold and calculated, which will throw people off, leading to difficulties in helping people open up.
They like to work alone, and silences during negotiation typically indicate they are thinking about what was just said. They see concessions as new pieces of information and as such take time to come up with a counterproposal as they revaluate all the data.
Lastly, avoid starting out with lots of questions as they won’t open up much until they have a good grasp of the overall situation. They are slow to respond to calibrated questions, but respond fairly well in the moment to labels.
Accommodator
Accommodators will spend most of the exchange building up a relationship with the other person. They put relationships above all else, and take their time to build fluid communication with you. They love win-win scenarios. With that said, of the three types they are most likely to build great rapport without achieving anything concrete.
They will also shy away from raising problems as that can lead to attrition with their counterpart. They will yield concessions to appease the other person.
If you’re sitting across an accommodator, be sociable and friendly. Let them talk about their ideas, but leverage calibrated questions to nudge them towards where you want to be. However, beware they might agree to things early on for the sake of triggering reciprocity, but not be able to follow through on the commitment.
Lastly, be careful of spending too much time with idle chat. Accommodators are prone to extend conversations and neither Analysts nor Assertives want to spend that much time talking for the sake of talking with little results to show for it.
Assertive
Time is money — that is the primary belief for the Assertive type. The self-image of an Assertive negotiator is linked to how much they can get accomplished in a period of time. They prioritize getting it done over a perfect solution.
Assertive types are direct, candid, competitive, and love winning above all else. They have an aggressive communication style and don’t worry about future interactions
Above all, an Assertive wants to be heard. They won’t listen to you until they know you’ve heard them. They typically focus on their goals rather than people. They tell rather than ask.
When sitting across an Assertive counterpart, focus on what they have to say, so they get their acknowledgment early and you can move on with your negotiation.
Beware of silences during exchanges because Assertives will see it as an opportunity to speak more. So if you are in the discovery phase, you can easily leverage mirrors, calibrated questions, labels, and summaries to get them to talk.
Lastly, if you’re Assertive be mindful of your tone of voice because you will easily come across as harsh. Intentionally soften your tone and use the above tactics to seem more approachable and increase chances of collaboration.
How the Types Play Together
Analysts see time as preparation, Accomodators see time as relationship, and Assertives see time as money. These are all hugely different perspectives and can lead to serious disruption during a negotiation if not handled with care.
A silence during the exchange will be perceived differently. Analysts will get annoyed at the others for not getting enough time to think. Accomodators will grow nervous because they start retracing in their heads what went wrong and might start speaking a lot. Assertives will eat up the chance to continue talking about what they know.
By all means, “read the room” and combine your own self-awareness with what you know about the other person so you can progress the negotiation smoothly without stepping too much on the toes of the type sitting across you.
“I am normal” Paradox
It’s intuitive to think other people see the world just like us, but that’s not true. The idea that you and the other person sitting across see the same thing, produce a relief that you are normal by association and unconsciously project your own negotiation style to the other person.
Don’t treat others the way you want to be treated; tread them the way they need to be treated.
However, there is a 66% chance they have a different negotiation style. Be open to the idea they are different from you and do things differently. This will skyrocket your chances to successfully identify their negotiation style and move things in a positive direction.
Taking a Punch…
Experienced negotiators will often lead with a ridiculous offer, what you call an extreme anchor. This can really feel like a punch to the face and make you go straight to your maximum value to close the deal.
However, you know the rules to this game, you start by looking for information so you let the other person go first to show their hand. Welcome that initial extreme anchor when it comes.
…and Punching Back
Now that you’ve let them get a punch in, it’s your turn to punch back. The good old calibrated questions that reply with a disguised “No” work wonders here. “How am I supposed to accept that?” and “What are we trying to achieve here?” are good retorts.
You can also pivot the conversation towards nonmonetary terms to get out of the haggle rabbit hole. “Let’s put price off the table for a moment and talk about what would make this a good deal”, or “What else would you be able to offer to make that a good price for me?”.
If the other person tries to force you to go first then don’t name a price. Instead, allude to an incredibly high extreme anchor that someone else might charge.
Real Anger, Threats Without Anger, and Strategic Umbrage
Sometimes the situation will call for you to be the one throwing the punch. Your counterpart is stuck in a rigid mindset and the negotiation is going nowhere. You need to shake things up.
Your anger shows passion and conviction that can help the other person to accept less. A real display of anger, not a fake emotion to intimidate the other side or it will have the reverse effect. Do be careful because a display of anger can backfire and increase their sense of danger which reduces the cognitive resources available — same goes for your own momentary anger by the way.
In practice, this short display of anger can materialize as a “I don’t see how that would ever work” retort after you hear an insulting offer.
“Why” Questions
“Why” should be avoided by standard when you want to use a calibrated question. “Why did you do that?” can flip their perception upside down and stop them on their tracks — keep in mind it’s not a sure-fire technique so use sparingly.
The other way to use “why” questions is to trigger defensiveness, but in this case for the other person to defend your position. “Why would you ever do business with me?” and “Why would you ever change from your existing supplier? They are great!” are good examples of forcing the other person to defend you.
“I” Messages
“I’m sorry, that doesn’t work for me” — this is a strategic use of “I” that sets a boundary without escalating the situation.
You can use the first-person singular pronoun strategically to pause the situation and come out of a bad dynamic. Another example is a sentence like “I feel … when you … because …”. Be cool and level-headed when using these sentences.
Don’t Be Needy
“Never split the difference” echoes here — no deal is better than a bad deal. Be prepared to defend your bottom line and walk away from a bad deal.
The Unsolved Issue is the Problem
The other person is never the problem — the problem is always the unsolved issue.
This is a reminder so that your engagement comes across as tough love, not hatred for the other person. They can definitely say things that upset you and put you on the edge, but never respond with an attack to the person sitting across you. Focus on the issue and de-escalate the situation.
Punching back is a last-resort. If need be, suggest a time-out. The other person can also take a breath and come out of the hostage mentality. You’ll both regain a sense of agency and power. Your counterpart will appreciate you for the time-out.
Ackerman Bargaining
The Ackerman model is an offer-counteroffer method on the surface. But in reality it moves away from the predictable meeting in the middle result of bargaining.
The model is split into six steps:
- Set your target price, i.e. your goal
- Throw a first offer that is 65% of your target price
- Use a maximum of three raises of decreasing increments (move to 85, then 95 and finally 100%)
- Leverage the usual empathy techniques to say “No” to make the other side counter before you raise
- For the final amount, use precise nonround numbers to create a sense of credibility and weight (e.g. €35,187 instead of €35,000)
- For your final value, also throw in a nonmonetary item to show you’re at your limit — even if it’s an item you know they don’t want
This method is highly effective because it incorporates the psychological tactics discussed before without explicitly creating a strategy to achieve them — reciprocity, extreme anchors, loss aversion, and more.
Your offer at 65% of your target value will be a slap in the face to the other person — it is by all means an extreme anchor. However, the decreasing increments to your raises demonstrate that you are willing to cooperate, but your margin is not massive and ever so close with each raise.
The raises also work on another angle — they generate reciprocity because you are making a concession, but also increase the other person’s self-esteem because they will feel they are the ones squeezing a better offer out of you.
If you’re lucky, the calibrated questions mixed in can make the other person start bidding against themselves!
At the end, the nonround final number creates a sense of credibility and weight because it comes across as thoughtful and justified. Use an odd number to enhance this.
Closing Thoughts
The later stages of a negotiation will lead to a bargaining face-off. This can be nerve-wracking and anxiety provoking, but with the right tactics you can have your cake and eat it too.
Be aware of your negotiation type and navigate the early negotiation stages to understand who is sitting across from you. Leverage the interplays between Analysts, Accommodators, and Assertives so you can navigate the conversation successfully. Use the strengths of your type and mix in elements of the other two types to approach the other person.
It also helps to be prepared when you sit down. Design an ambitious goal and prepare labels, calibrated questions, and your responses on how you will steer the conversation. Remember, you won’t rise to the occasion; you will fall to the highest level of preparation. An Ackerman plan can be a wonderful aid to handle all that mental infrastructure and you fill in the journey to get to your monetary goal.
And finally, be prepared to exchange verbal punches with the other person. You should only punch back as a last resort, for example if you’re in a rut and need to shake the situation up. But, the other side might be aggressive and throw out a punch right away. In that case take the hit and fall back to trusty calibrated questions or pivot to nonmonetary questions so you can stay in control rather than fall prey to them.
