Win your next tough negotiation
Unverified●27/40Claude Code◐PartialHas SKILL.md but declares no allowed-tools — Claude Code will ask for permission each time
Cursor◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in — but no Cursor rules file
Codex◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in — but no AGENTS.md
Gemini CLI◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in
Copilot◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in — but no Copilot instructions file
npx agentalley add negotiationWho is stuck, and on what
You've got a big conversation coming up about money or terms and you're dreading it, because the other side has the upper hand and you always seem to cave or split the difference. You never know the exact words to use so you don't come off as pushy or desperate.
What it gives you
A one-page script for your specific situation: the opening lines, the questions to ask, the emotions to name out loud, your walk-away point, and the traps to avoid.
When NOT to use it
It will not attend the meeting or send emails for you, and it can't guarantee the other side says yes.
The whole source
Frontmatter — 4 properties
| name | negotiation |
|---|---|
| description | Prepare and execute negotiations using tactical empathy, calibrated questions, and the Ackerman method. Use when the user mentions "salary negotiation", "contract terms", "handling objections", "mirroring and labeling", "difficult conversation", "deal terms", "BATNA", "anchoring", "how do I ask for a raise", "get a better deal", or "they wont budge on price". Also trigger when preparing for a vendor negotiation, resolving a pricing dispute, or navigating a high-stakes conversation where both sides need to feel heard. Covers accusation audits, Black Swan discovery, and the "Thats Right" technique. For persuasion in product and marketing, see influence-psychology. |
| license | MIT |
| metadata | author: wondelai version: "1.5.0 |
| 1 | --- |
| 2 | name: negotiation |
| 3 | description: 'Prepare and execute negotiations using tactical empathy, calibrated questions, and the Ackerman method. Use when the user mentions "salary negotiation", "contract terms", "handling objections", "mirroring and labeling", "difficult conversation", "deal terms", "BATNA", "anchoring", "how do I ask for a raise", "get a better deal", or "they wont budge on price". Also trigger when preparing for a vendor negotiation, resolving a pricing dispute, or navigating a high-stakes conversation where both sides need to feel heard. Covers accusation audits, Black Swan discovery, and the "Thats Right" technique. For persuasion in product and marketing, see influence-psychology.'B1 — Line is 685 characters — unreadable by eye |
| 4 | license: MIT |
| 5 | metadata: |
| 6 | author: wondelai |
| 7 | version: "1.5.0" |
| 8 | ---A5 — No allowed-tools declared — no way to tell what this skill may touch |
| 9 | |
| 10 | # Negotiation |
| 11 | |
| 12 | Tactical empathy-based negotiation framework from FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss. Understand the emotional drivers behind decisions and use proven techniques to build rapport, uncover hidden information, and reach better outcomes. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | ## Core Principle |
| 15 | |
| 16 | **People want to be understood and feel safe.** The most effective path to "yes" runs through empathy, active listening, and emotional intelligence -- not logic, arguments, or compromise. Treat every negotiation as a discovery process: your assumptions are hypotheses to test, and the other side's needs (respect, security, autonomy) matter more than their stated positions. Never split the difference -- no deal is better than a bad deal. |
| 17 | |
| 18 | ## Scoring |
| 19 | |
| 20 | **Goal: 10/10.** Score 1 point per satisfied Quick Diagnostic row (6 rows), plus up to 4 points for execution quality: emotions labeled out loud (+1), "That's right" earned not "You're right" (+1), no "Why?" / no splitting the difference / no chasing "yes" (+1), at least one Black Swan surfaced (+1). Bands: **9-10** = audit delivered, calibrated questions and BATNA prepared, "That's right" achieved, Black Swans hunted; **5-6** = some prep but arguing the position or chasing "yes"; **<=3** = no audit, no BATNA, splitting the difference. Always state the current score and the specific gaps to reach 10/10.B1 — Line is 610 characters — unreadable by eye |
| 21 | |
| 22 | ## Framework |
| 23 | |
| 24 | ### 1. Tactical Empathy |
| 25 | |
| 26 | **Core concept:** Consciously imagine yourself in the counterpart's situation, then vocalize their perspective to create trust and openness. |
| 27 | |
| 28 | **Why it works:** When people feel understood, brain chemistry shifts toward trust and cooperation, short-circuiting defensive reactions. Empathy is not agreement -- you can understand their position while advocating your own. |
| 29 | |
| 30 | **Key insights:** |
| 31 | - Before responding, ask: "What is their world like right now?" |
| 32 | - Articulate their situation, pressures, and fears before stating your position |
| 33 | - Empathy must be genuine, not performed -- people detect fakeness instantly |
| 34 | - Unconditional positive regard: respect them as a person regardless of disagreement |
| 35 | - Emotions are contagious -- stay calm and positive; slow pace enables clear thinking |
| 36 | |
| 37 | **Product applications:** |
| 38 | |
| 39 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 40 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 41 | | **Customer support** | Acknowledge frustration before solving | "I understand this outage is affecting your team's deadline" | |
| 42 | | **Sales calls** | Voice the prospect's pressures | "It sounds like you're under pressure to show results this quarter" | |
| 43 | | **Pricing conversations** | Acknowledge budget constraints upfront | "I know adding another tool to the stack feels risky right now" | |
| 44 | |
| 45 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 46 | - "I understand you're dealing with..." |
| 47 | - "It seems like this is creating pressure for your team..." |
| 48 | - "Before we talk about next steps, I want to make sure I understand where you're coming from..." |
| 49 | |
| 50 | See [references/techniques.md](references/techniques.md) for the full 21-technique reference -- each section below points to the part you need at the moment you need it. Open it now for The Power of Apology and Pause, which has no section here. |
| 51 | |
| 52 | ### 2. Mirroring |
| 53 | |
| 54 | **Core concept:** Repeat the last 1-3 critical words your counterpart said, with a curious, upward-inflecting tone, then go silent. |
| 55 | |
| 56 | **Why it works:** Mirroring signals deep listening, creating familiarity and rapport. It prompts elaboration without direct questions, revealing more than the counterpart intended to share. |
| 57 | |
| 58 | **Key insights:** |
| 59 | - Repeat the key or emotion-laden words back as a gentle question |
| 60 | - Wait silently (4+ seconds) for them to expand |
| 61 | - Works in person, on the phone, and in written communication |
| 62 | - The simplest technique, but often the most effective for information gathering |
| 63 | |
| 64 | **Product applications:** |
| 65 | |
| 66 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 67 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 68 | | **Discovery calls** | Mirror key concerns to get elaboration | Client: "The timeline is tight." You: "The timeline is tight?" | |
| 69 | | **User interviews** | Encourage deeper explanation of pain | User: "It's just frustrating." You: "Frustrating?" | |
| 70 | | **Objection handling** | Reflect to find the root cause | "Doesn't fit your budget?" | |
| 71 | |
| 72 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 73 | - "[Key phrase they used]?" (with question mark) |
| 74 | - "You mentioned [their exact words]..." |
| 75 | - "When you say [mirror], what does that look like?" |
| 76 | |
| 77 | ### 3. Labeling |
| 78 | |
| 79 | **Core concept:** Identify and verbalize the counterpart's emotions or perspective using neutral phrases: "It seems like...", "It sounds like...", "It looks like..." |
| 80 | |
| 81 | **Why it works:** Naming emotions validates them -- labeling negative emotions diffuses their power, labeling positive emotions reinforces them. The tentative phrasing gives room to correct you, which deepens the conversation either way. |
| 82 | |
| 83 | **Key insights:** |
| 84 | - Always use third-person phrasing ("It seems like..."), never "I think you..." |
| 85 | - After labeling, be silent -- let them respond |
| 86 | - A wrong label still pays: their correction is valuable information |
| 87 | - Watch for emotional shifts that signal you've hit the mark |
| 88 | |
| 89 | **Product applications:** |
| 90 | |
| 91 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 92 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 93 | | **Customer complaints** | Name the frustration before solving | "It sounds like you feel let down by our response time" | |
| 94 | | **Sales objections** | Label the underlying concern | "It seems like there's a concern about implementation risk" | |
| 95 | | **Churn prevention** | Identify the real reason for leaving | "It sounds like something changed since you first signed up" | |
| 96 | |
| 97 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 98 | - "It seems like..." |
| 99 | - "It sounds like you're feeling..." |
| 100 | - "If I'm reading this right, it feels like..." |
| 101 | |
| 102 | ### 4. Calibrated Questions |
| 103 | |
| 104 | **Core concept:** Open-ended "How...?" and "What...?" questions that shape the conversation while giving the counterpart the illusion of control. |
| 105 | |
| 106 | **Why it works:** Calibrated questions engage the counterpart's problem-solving mind, making them feel in charge while you steer. They force the other side to consider your position without you stating it, and avoid the defensiveness "Why?" creates. |
| 107 | |
| 108 | **Key insights:** |
| 109 | - Start with "How" or "What" -- avoid "Why" (sounds accusatory) |
| 110 | - "How am I supposed to do that?" is the most powerful pushback without saying no |
| 111 | - Keep the tone genuinely collaborative, never sarcastic |
| 112 | - Exception for "Why": only when you want them to defend something favorable to you ("Why would you ever choose our company?") |
| 113 | - Follow every "yes" with "How...?" to secure implementation commitment |
| 114 | |
| 115 | **Product applications:** |
| 116 | |
| 117 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 118 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 119 | | **Price negotiation** | Push back without refusing | "How am I supposed to do that at that price point?" | |
| 120 | | **Scope creep** | Make them own the constraint | "What happens to the timeline if we add this?" | |
| 121 | | **Stakeholder alignment** | Uncover hidden decision-makers | "How does your team typically make decisions like this?" | |
| 122 | |
| 123 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 124 | - "How am I supposed to do that?" |
| 125 | - "What's the biggest challenge you're facing?" |
| 126 | - "What would it take to make this happen?" |
| 127 | |
| 128 | For No-oriented questions ("Would it be unreasonable to...?") and tactical mislabeling to draw out a corrective "No", see techniques.md section 8 when a counterpart is guarded or stalling. |
| 129 | |
| 130 | ### 5. Accusation Audit |
| 131 | |
| 132 | **Core concept:** Before negotiating, list and preemptively verbalize every negative thing the counterpart might think or say about you. |
| 133 | |
| 134 | **Why it works:** Naming fears and criticisms before the other side does removes their power -- it often triggers reassurance ("Oh, I don't think that...") and at minimum neutralizes objections. Addressing the elephants first demonstrates self-awareness and builds trust. |
| 135 | |
| 136 | **Key insights:** |
| 137 | - Brainstorm every negative they might think before the meeting |
| 138 | - Deliver the audit early in the conversation, not after objections surface |
| 139 | - Overshoot on purpose -- the list should sound slightly worse than what they actually think |
| 140 | - Particularly powerful when you're the party with less leverage |
| 141 | |
| 142 | **Product applications:** |
| 143 | |
| 144 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 145 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 146 | | **Price increase announcement** | Preempt anger before explaining | "You're probably thinking we don't value your loyalty..." | |
| 147 | | **Sales cold outreach** | Acknowledge the intrusion | "I know you're busy and the last thing you want is another sales pitch..." | |
| 148 | | **Service failure recovery** | Own the failure fully | "You're probably furious, and you have every right to be..." | |
| 149 | |
| 150 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 151 | - "You probably think..." |
| 152 | - "I know this might seem like..." |
| 153 | - "You might be wondering why you should even listen to..." |
| 154 | |
| 155 | ### 6. "That's Right" |
| 156 | |
| 157 | **Core concept:** Summarize the counterpart's position -- facts, emotions, and concerns -- so accurately that they respond with "That's right." This is the breakthrough moment in any negotiation. |
| 158 | |
| 159 | **Why it works:** "That's right" signals the person feels completely understood, shifting their mindset from adversarial to collaborative. It is fundamentally different from "You're right," which usually means they're dismissing you. |
| 160 | |
| 161 | **Key insights:** |
| 162 | - "That's right" is the two most powerful words in negotiation; if you get "You're right," keep working -- you haven't connected yet |
| 163 | - Include emotional subtext in your summary, not just facts |
| 164 | - Let them say "No" first to feel safe, then work toward "That's right" |
| 165 | - Use the Rule of Three: confirm agreement three times in three different ways |
| 166 | |
| 167 | **Product applications:** |
| 168 | |
| 169 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 170 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 171 | | **Sales closing** | Summarize their needs before proposing | "So your team needs X, you're worried about Y, and Z is the deal-breaker..." | |
| 172 | | **Customer retention** | Show you understand why they're leaving | "Let me make sure I have this: the product isn't delivering on the promise we made..." | |
| 173 | | **Negotiation closure** | Confirm understanding before terms | "Let me make sure I understand: you need [X], by [date], and [constraint]..." | |
| 174 | |
| 175 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 176 | - "Let me make sure I understand..." |
| 177 | - "If I'm hearing you correctly..." |
| 178 | - "It sounds like [complete summary of their position including emotions]..." |
| 179 | |
| 180 | For the three types of Yes (counterfeit, confirmation, commitment) and the Rule of Three confirmation sequence, see techniques.md sections 10-11 when closing or locking in a commitment. |
| 181 | |
| 182 | ### 7. Ackerman Bargaining |
| 183 | |
| 184 | **Core concept:** A systematic monetary negotiation method: calculated offers in decreasing increments (65% -> 85% -> 95% -> 100% of target) with precise non-round numbers and a non-monetary bonus at the end. |
| 185 | |
| 186 | **Why it works:** Decreasing increments signal you're approaching your limit, and precise numbers ($47,235 vs $47,000) feel calculated and final. The closing non-monetary gift signals generosity at the limit, making it psychologically harder to ask for more. |
| 187 | |
| 188 | **Key insights:** |
| 189 | - Set your target price first, then open at 65% and raise in decreasing increments: 85% -> 95% -> 100% |
| 190 | - Use precise, non-round numbers on the final offer ($10,230 not $10,000) |
| 191 | - Attach a non-monetary bonus to the final offer ("...and I'll include X") |
| 192 | - Never make a concession without getting something in return |
| 193 | |
| 194 | **Product applications:** |
| 195 | |
| 196 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 197 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 198 | | **Salary negotiation** | Structure counter-offers systematically | Target $120K: open at $78K, move to $102K, $114K, final $120,350 + extra PTO | |
| 199 | | **Vendor pricing** | Methodical price reduction | Target $50K: start $32.5K, move to $42.5K, $47.5K, final $49,850 + extended payment terms | |
| 200 | | **SaaS enterprise deals** | Multi-year pricing negotiations | Decreasing discount increments across contract years | |
| 201 | |
| 202 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 203 | - "Based on our analysis, we can offer $[precise number]..." |
| 204 | - "We've stretched as far as we can -- $[precise number], and we'll include [non-monetary bonus]" |
| 205 | - "I've gone back to my team and the absolute best we can do is $[precise number]" |
| 206 | |
| 207 | For setting the opening anchor, soft range-anchoring, and framing loss aversion, see techniques.md section 14 before you name the first number. |
| 208 | |
| 209 | ### 8. Black Swans |
| 210 | |
| 211 | **Core concept:** Hidden, game-changing pieces of information that transform a negotiation once discovered. Every negotiation has approximately three lurking. |
| 212 | |
| 213 | **Why it works:** Negotiations stall or fail when critical information stays hidden. Black Swans -- the unknown unknowns -- explain seemingly irrational behavior, and discovering even one can turn a stalemate into a breakthrough. |
| 214 | |
| 215 | **Key insights:** |
| 216 | - Three types: secret constraints (boss capped the budget), hidden motivations (this deal saves their job), unknown context (a competitor just moved) |
| 217 | - Watch for anomalies -- odd reactions, hesitations, inconsistencies -- and listen in unguarded moments before and after meetings |
| 218 | - If they seem irrational, diagnose: ill-informed, constrained, or hiding something? |
| 219 | - Use all three leverage types -- positive (what they want), negative (what they fear), normative (their own stated values) -- to surface hidden information |
| 220 | |
| 221 | **Product applications:** |
| 222 | |
| 223 | | Context | Application | Example | |
| 224 | |---------|-------------|---------| |
| 225 | | **Enterprise sales** | Discover hidden budget or timeline constraints | "What happens internally if this doesn't get resolved by Q3?" | |
| 226 | | **Churn analysis** | Uncover the real cancellation reason | "It seems like something changed -- what happened?" | |
| 227 | | **Hiring negotiations** | Discover the candidate's true priorities | "What would make you regret not taking this offer?" | |
| 228 | |
| 229 | **Copy patterns:** |
| 230 | - "What's the biggest thing I'm missing here?" |
| 231 | - "Help me understand -- what's really driving this?" |
| 232 | - "What would change everything about this situation?" |
| 233 | |
| 234 | For applying the three leverage types, reading pronoun shifts that reveal who really decides, and using dynamic silence to draw out hidden information, see techniques.md sections 16, 20, and 21 when a negotiation stalls or you suspect a hidden decision-maker. |
| 235 | |
| 236 | ## Handling Common Situations |
| 237 | |
| 238 | - **They say "That's not fair":** Stop immediately: "I want to be fair. Have I done something unfair? Let's discuss it." |
| 239 | - **They anchor with an extreme number:** Don't counter; ask "How did you arrive at that figure?" |
| 240 | - **They stop responding:** Send "Have you given up on [the project]?" -- triggers a "No" response |
| 241 | - **They seem irrational:** Diagnose with calibrated questions: ill-informed, constrained, or hiding something? |
| 242 | |
| 243 | ## Counterpart Styles |
| 244 | |
| 245 | | Style | Signs | Adapt by... | |
| 246 | |-------|-------|-------------| |
| 247 | | **Analyst** | Methodical, data-driven, hates surprises | Use facts, be patient, don't rush | |
| 248 | | **Accommodator** | Friendly, relationship-focused, avoids conflict | Build rapport, but pin down specifics | |
| 249 | | **Assertive** | Direct, time-conscious, wants to win | Be efficient, stand firm, acknowledge their points | |
| 250 | |
| 251 | **Insight:** Great negotiators borrow from all three styles as needed. |
| 252 | |
| 253 | ## Voice and Delivery |
| 254 | |
| 255 | - **Default voice**: Positive, warm, light-hearted (with a smile) |
| 256 | - **Critical moments**: Late-Night DJ Voice -- slow, calm, downward inflection |
| 257 | - **After key statements**: Pause 4+ seconds (tactical silence) |
| 258 | - **Watch their nonverbals**: 7% words, 38% tone, 55% body language |
| 259 | |
| 260 | See techniques.md sections 4 and 19 when you need the full Late-Night DJ Voice mechanics and the cues to read in their body language. |
| 261 | |
| 262 | ## Common Mistakes |
| 263 | |
| 264 | | Mistake | Why It Fails | Fix | |
| 265 | |---------|-------------|------| |
| 266 | | **Splitting the difference** | Lukewarm outcomes nobody is happy with | Hold firm; no deal is better than a bad deal | |
| 267 | | **Pushing for "yes"** | Makes people defensive; produces counterfeit agreement | Pursue "That's right"; let them say "No" first | |
| 268 | | **Arguing your position** | Triggers resistance and shuts down listening | Use calibrated questions and labels to let them talk | |
| 269 | | **Skipping the accusation audit** | Unaddressed objections fester and derail later | List every negative they might think; address early | |
| 270 | | **Countering an extreme anchor immediately** | Validates their anchor as the starting point | Mirror, label, ask "How did you arrive at that?" | |
| 271 | | **Using "Why?"** | Sounds accusatory and triggers defensiveness | Replace with "What" and "How" questions | |
| 272 | | **Treating "You're right" as success** | It means they want you to go away | Keep working toward "That's right" | |
| 273 | |
| 274 | ## Quick Diagnostic |
| 275 | |
| 276 | | Question | If No | Action | |
| 277 | |----------|-------|--------| |
| 278 | | Have I prepared an accusation audit? | Objections will blindside you | List every negative they might think; address early | |
| 279 | | Do I have 3-5 calibrated questions ready? | You'll default to arguing | Draft "How" and "What" questions targeting their needs | |
| 280 | | Have I identified my BATNA? | You'll accept a bad deal under pressure | Define your walk-away point before negotiating | |
| 281 | | Am I aiming for "That's right"? | You'll chase counterfeit "yes" | Summarize their position until they affirm genuinely | |
| 282 | | Have I considered their negotiation style? | One-size-fits-all will misfire | Assess if they're Analyst, Accommodator, or Assertive | |
| 283 | | Am I hunting for Black Swans? | You'll miss game-changing information | Stay curious; watch for anomalies; ask about the unexpected | |
| 284 | |
| 285 | ## Further Reading |
| 286 | |
| 287 | Based on Chris Voss's experience as an FBI hostage negotiator: |
| 288 | |
| 289 | - [*"Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It"*](https://www.amazon.com/Never-Split-Difference-Negotiating-Depended/dp/0062407805?tag=wondelai00-20) by Chris Voss with Tahl Raz |
| 290 | - [*"The Full Fee Agent: How to Stack the Odds in Your Favor as a Real Estate Professional"*](https://www.amazon.com/Full-Fee-Agent-Stack-Professional/dp/1544534655?tag=wondelai00-20) by Chris Voss and Steve Shull (the same principles applied to real estate and professional services) |
| 291 | |
| 292 | ## About the Author |
| 293 | |
| 294 | **Chris Voss** is a former FBI lead international kidnapping negotiator who worked over 150 hostage situations in a 24-year career, and the founder of the Black Swan Group, which trains businesses in tactical negotiation. He has taught at Harvard Law School, Georgetown, and MIT Sloan; *Never Split the Difference* is one of the most widely recommended business books in the world. |
| 295 |
Reviews
Installed this one?Write the first review and take the Trailblazer badge.
Alternatives
Structure Your Invention For A Patent FilingDescribe your invention in plain words and get back a formal write-up that lays out the problem it solves, how it works, and which parts are worth protecting.●····●37/40Claims Drafting: The Core Patent SkillDescribe your invention in plain words and get back a numbered set of formal patent claims — the legal wording that defines exactly what you own.●····●36/40Patent Novelty and Non-Obviousness CheckDescribe your invention in everyday words and get back a clear read on whether it's new and original enough to patent, plus where it might hit trouble.●····●35/40Patent Pipeline: From Invention to FilingDescribe your invention in plain words and get back a complete first-draft patent application — claims, full description, and abstract — ready to hand to a patent attorney.●····●35/40