Tactical Empathy — “Never Split the Difference” Chapter 3 Summary
After learning how to build rapport, the next negotiation technique is tactical empathy.
Empathy & Sympathy
There is a big distinction to make right off the bat between empathy and sympathy.
With empathy, you pay attention to someone else, ask what they are felling, and make a commitment to understand their world. It’s about understanding the other person. You convey to them you are paying attention, you understand their point of view, and once they know you are listening they may tell you something useful to advance the conversation.
Note this definition only mentions understanding and describing their perspective, not agreeing nor feeling what they feel — simply understand a situation from someone else’s perspective. Then, sympathy is the feeling, the moment when you can feel and agree with what the other person is feeling or believing in.
Tactical empathy
Take things up a notch and you get tactical empathy: understanding the feelings and mindset of another person, but also paying attention to what is behind those feelings. It’s about paying attention to both the emotional turmoil and the potential routes for getting to an agreement.
This is why your attitude going into a confrontation can make or break your case. If you’re going in concerned only about proving your point, chances are negotiation fails. The other person notices your hostility and, well, selfishness, and will immediately raise their guard lessening the chance of an agreement.
However if you start calm, the other person can equally notice it and be more attuned to the conversation, thus increasing the chances of success for you.
For the neuroscience fans, this is closely tied to neural resonance. When we pay attention to another person’s face, gestures, and tone of voice, our brain starts to align with theirs. In other words, our initial aggression can make the other person more aggressive and our calmness can calm the other person down.
Put out a label
Another powerful technique to help someone elaborate is a label.
“It seems like you are not too happy with the current proposal.”
“That’s true, I see this value as too low because of XYZ.”
With a label, you map impressions to words about how the other person is feeling. This is especially powerful if, during a negotiation, you label a fear you can tell the other person is going through.
Again with neuroscience, the amygdala is the part of the brain responsible for monitoring any new stimuli — positive or negative it’s always standing guard. The label cuts straight to the point: the negative thought is not hanging around the amygdala for too long, rather it’s surfaced immediately and addressed then and there.
With the problem addressed, the other person can then start generating more positive feelings of safety, well-being, and trust. You’ve got to clear down the barriers to agreement as early as possible. Denying barriers or negative influences gives them credence, so get them into the open to be resolved.
It’s always about making the other person more comfortable so you can work collaboratively towards the agreement.
One last thing about labels: pause after you label a barrier or mirror a statement to let it sink in. And don’t worry, the other person will fill the silence.
Boost your image with accusation audits
On top of using labels to surface fears, insecurities, and any other negative feelings the other person might be going through, it’s also a good strategy to list out negatives.
Specifically, Chris means for you to list out the worst things the other person could say about you, but here you do it before they do. This is called an accusation audit.
“It probably sounds like I am self-centered with pushing my ideas.”
“No, I can tell you’re making a point for the team to develop a better solution.”
This upfront honesty — again, you don’t need to necessarily agree with it, but rather it’s almost like you are labeling yourself out loud from the other person’s perspective — helps clear out negative impressions before they take root in their head.
Moreover, these accusations can end up sounding exaggerated out loud, so they will help your cause for the other person to claim the opposite is true. Once more you will surface and resolve any potential negative ideas on their head, plus they will likely intervene to shed a more positive light on you!
Closing thoughts
As Chris reminds at the end of the chapter, you should think of the techniques taught in the book as extensions to natural human interactions instead of artificial tics.
People like to feel attended to and acknowledged when interacting with others. People enjoy to elaborate on their situation. You can see these techniques as emotional best practices to overcome a few intrinsic weaknesses that show during critical conversations.
Ultimately, these techniques help you connect and create more meaningful relationships. It just so happens the techniques can also serve to get you where you want; but the human connection is the primary goal.
