Talking about negotiation, like other people, I am not so good at handling “NO” as a reply. I mean, after I get a no, for me the conversation is closed and I get frustrated.
But there is a scientific reason behind this feeling of frustration.
When we are trying to get something, receiving a “No” triggers negative emotions because it can be associated with social rejection.
Social Acceptance is a mechanism of survival, in the past no man could survive alone in the savannah and so being accepted and with others was critical.
And today?
The pain for rejection is still here, according to Naomi Eisenberger, PhD, at the University of California, Los Angeles, Kipling Williams, PhD, at Purdue University, and colleagues, social rejection activates many of the same brain regions involved in physical pain (Science, 2003).
Some people instead of focusing on the social rejection, think about their ultimate goal and work on it without taking their eyes off the ball.
Chriss Voss’s personal story is a brilliant example which is used to open the third chapter of Never Split the Difference.
Emblematic is how he started working for the FBI’s Crisis Negotiation Team in New York.
He met her boss Amy Bonderow:
“I want be a hostage negotiator”
“Everyone does, got any training?”
“No”
“Any credentials?”
“Nope”
“Any experience?”
“No”
“Do you have a degree in psychology, sociology, anything at all related to negotiation?”
“No”
“Looks like you answered your own question” she said “No. Now go away”
“Go away?” – “Really?”
“Yep. As in, “Leave me alone”. Everybody wants to be a hostage negotiator, and you have no resume, experience, or skills” So what would you say in my position? You got it: “No””
The author after this chat didn’t give up and started thinking how he could overcome the opposition:
“Come on, there has to be something I can do”.
After that Amy replied with an ironic laugh:
“I’ll tell you what. Yes, there is something you can do: Volunteer at a suicide hotline. Then come talk to me. No guarantees, got it”
“No” is where the negotiation starts, not where it finishes.
When the counterpart says “No”, she is protecting herself and after saying No, she’s in a phase of relaxation, she’s more prone to listen.
In this blog I talked about stress and how we get stressed by things we can’t control. In my opinion, the concepts in that older post are connected to this negotiation topic.
In a similar way also in negotiation, people need to feel in control in order to reduce stress and fear. So if you give them the possibility to say “no”: “the effectiveness of the decisions go up”.
Personally I never understood the importance of “No” mainly because I was more focused on the “pain” of the rejection, on why the other person told me “No” and not on the fear of my counterpart and their need for control.
There are several reasons behind a “No” that we can interpret in different ways based on the specific situation:
- I am not yet ready to agree
- You are making me feel uncomfortable
- I do not understand
- I don’t think I can afford it
- I want something else
- I need more information
- I want to talk it over with someone else
In general what we can do after getting a “NO” is investigate better our counterpart position:
“What about this doesn’t work for you?”
Three levels of YES
If it is true that “No” is the starting point, at the end of the negotiation we are asking for a “Yes” to our requests.
There are three kinds of “Yes” discussed in the book:
- Counterfeit
- Confirmation
- Commitment
The first one is the one we usually say to end the conversation, even though we would like to say “No”. We want to cut down the conversation as quickly as possible and we say “Yes”, but the reality is that we would like to say “No”.
Confirmation “Yes” is the general reply to a binary question, “Do you like going on holiday?” “Would you like to have more money in your life?”, no-brainer questions that are not very helpful for the negotiation.
It is only the “Commitment Yes”, the one we are seeking in a negotiation, because it is the one where the counterpart is confident about the decision and committed to it.
It’s not about you
Another key aspect described in this chapter that I always try to stress to people I’m close to, especially when they try to coach or mentor someone, is this simple fact:
“In every agreement, the result comes from someone else’s decisions”.
Too often I see discussion when one party tries to control the conversation, to bring the counterpart to their point of view by leveraging logic and get a “Counterfeit Yes”, but not a “Commitment Yes”.
Trying to control with logic the counterpart will not work, or at least is very unlikely.
“While we can’t control others’ decisions, we can influence them by inhabiting their world and seeing and hearing exactly what they want”.
Relying too much on logic as a tool of persuasion was one of the initial mistakes Chris Voss made at the beginning of his career while working on the suicide hotline “Helpline”.
In one of the first calls with a frequent caller, a person with a specific mental disorder that will call multiple times in a week, he tried to use logic to bring the counterpart to his side.
The call ended this way:
“Thank you Chris, Thanks for doing such a great job”.
But what was the mistake? Why if the other person said all these nice words, it was a terrible call?
Because the other person doesn’t need to congratulate Chris, but he or she needs to find their own way, they must feel the solution is “their solution”, not something coming from outside.
“No” is protection
We need to understand that the first “No” is not a failure, but it’s the beginning of the negotiation.
“It’s a reaffirmation of autonomy” from the other side.
By saying “NO”, during a conversation, we define our identity as decision makers and after that we are more relaxed to listen to other options.
The author highlights 5 reasons why we can get a first “NO”:
- “No” allows the real issues to be brought forth
- “No” protect people from making, and let them correct ineffective decisions
- “No” slows things down so that people can freely embrace their decisions and the agreements they enter into
- “No” helps people feel safe, secure, emotionally comfortable, and in control of their decisions
- “No” moves everyone’s efforts forward
Personal Thoughts
I will be blunt, I am not good at handling “NO”.
In the past with a NO the conversation was closed because I never thought to investigate “why” I got a NO.
Continuing the conversation after a “NO” was wrong, “too pushy” and not respectful of the other side.
I need to say that this chapter helped me to change my perspective.
Investigating the “NO” through additional questions is not being pushy, but it gives a better understanding of all the reasons behind the “NO” choice of the counterpart.
Some of these can be reasonable and I am aware of them. I can figure out solutions that can be suitable to find an agreement.
I honestly don’t know how much time or how many shots it will take to handle “NO” as a reply and being able to transform into an effective deal, but being aware of that is for sure a critical starting point.
In the end
I am still trying to apply these strategies in my daily life and I have to say it’s not easy, it requires a lot of practice.
I think the key and obvious reason is because emotions are involved.
After a “No”, emotions make it hard to detach from what the other person is saying, the focus shifting away from our negotiation goal to our feelings.
Again, nothing is impossible with practice and awareness, I am sure after this reading you will start reacting differently when you get a “No”.
Reference
Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion, Naomi I Eisenberger 1, Matthew D Lieberman, Kipling D Williams
