PDF Summary:Start with No, by Jim Camp

Many negotiators think of a win-win deal as the best outcome. However, in Start With No, negotiation expert Jim Camp argues that more often than not, a so-called win-win is actually a win-lose in disguise where one party concedes too much. To avoid these deals, he suggests you say “no” during your negotiations—and invite your counterpart to also say “no”—instead of trying for a quick yes. Using the power of “no,” you can reduce your sense of neediness, promote rational thinking, and make your counterpart more receptive to saying “yes” to a sustainable, favorable deal.

In this guide, we’ll discuss how saying and inviting “no” can help you avoid common negotiation pitfalls, get the upper hand, and secure better deals. We’ll also explore Camp’s other negotiation strategies, including how to prepare effectively, keep your emotions under control, and focus on your counterpart's needs. Along the way, we’ll compare Camp’s tactics to those of other negotiation experts and provide additional tips to help you put his approach into practice.

(continued)...

Encouraging Rational Decision-Making

Camp writes that encouraging your counterpart to say “no” puts them in a more rational state of mind, which can increase your chances of closing your deal. He explains that people typically make decisions based on emotions (and later use logic to justify the decisions they make). Since decision-making is emotional, they may reject your proposal if for example, they feel anxiety or discomfort about it. Thus, to increase your chances of a favorable outcome, you must help your counterpart overcome their emotions and make focused, logic-driven decisions.

Camp says giving people permission to reject an offer allows them to take a step back and evaluate your proposal more objectively. When they feel free to refuse, they're more likely to consider the real consequences of their decisions, which can counterintuitively make them more open to accepting your offer For instance, if you're trying to sell your car, you might say to the potential buyer, "I understand if this car isn't the right fit for you. Feel free to say 'no' if it doesn't meet your needs." This can lessen the feeling of pressure, which can reduce their anxiety and thus reduce their resistance, allowing them to see the value in what you're offering.

(Shortform note: While Camp recommends you only ask the other party to say “no,” Chris Voss suggests you actually get them to say “no.” In Never Split the Difference, Voss recommends framing questions so that they prompt negative answers. For example, after proposing a rent amount to the landlord, you could ask, “Does this sound like an unreasonable offer?” instead of “Does this sound like a reasonable offer?” The first question works better because people hesitate to make commitments, which saying “yes” requires them to do. Because of this, people feel more comfortable saying “no.” Voss explains that when people say “no,” they feel more in control, which makes them more likely to agree to what you want.)

Inviting Further Discussion

Camp writes that many negotiators are afraid to hear “no” because they think it shuts off options or terminates the negotiation altogether. However, he argues that the opposite is true—“no” serves as a stepping stone and moves negotiations forward because it invites parties to probe for deeper understanding, clarify needs, explore alternatives, and suggest modifications.

(Shortform note: The fear of hearing "no" is deeply rooted in our evolutionary need to belong and avoid rejection. For our ancestors, being ostracized from the social group was as much of a threat to survival as physical injury, and when a negotiation is terminated, it can feel like being ostracized. So when a negotiator hears "no", it can trigger that deep-seated fear of exclusion and isolation. It can thus take purposeful effort to quell our natural instincts and see “no” as an invitation to move forward rather than an eviction from the group.)

If the other party does say "no," you can ask follow-up questions to better understand their perspective and concerns and find ways to address them so that you can still get what you want.

For example, let’s say you want to rent an apartment. When you propose the rent you’re willing to pay, invite the landlord to say “no.” The landlord will either agree or reject your offer. A “no” wouldn’t end the negotiation but push it forward. The landlord would explain why they can’t accept your offer, which gives you information to alter your proposal. For example, you might find out that if you extend your rental period, the landlord will accept the rental amount you proposed.

Use Empathic Listening to Understand Reasons Behind “No”

Experts note that to understand the true feelings and needs behind your counterpart’s initial refusal, you must listen with empathy. In Nonviolent Communication, Marshall B. Rosenberg explains that listening with empathy means resisting the urge to argue, give advice, or try to "fix" the situation. Instead, focus on listening for the other person’s underlying emotions and needs. He recommends you paraphrase their feelings and needs back to them in the form of questions to ensure you understand their perspective accurately.

For example, you might ask questions like, "Are you feeling hesitant because you need more information about the potential risks?" By offering the other party your full, focused attention and reflecting their emotions without judgment, you create a safe space for them to open up and share their concerns more honestly. As you continue to listen empathically, the other party may even gain new insights into their own feelings and needs, leading to a deeper understanding of the situation for both of you. From this place of mutual understanding, you can then work together to find creative ways to address their concerns and reach a satisfying agreement.

Other Negotiating Techniques

Now that you know the power of saying and inviting "no,” let’s dive into other negotiating techniques Camp recommends to keep emotions in check, make more logical decisions, and secure better deals.

Define the Ultimate Purpose of Your Negotiation

Camp writes that to set yourself up for success, you must identify the purpose of your negotiation. A clear purpose provides you with direction, ensuring the decisions you make are focused and valuable. It also safeguards you from agreeing to a deal that you don’t actually want. He recommends you make it clear and concise, and that you write it down so you can reference it regularly.

When crafting your purpose, Camp suggests you:

1. Frame your goal to show how it will benefit the other party. For example, when negotiating a job offer, don’t make it your purpose to “secure a higher-paying job that advances my career.” A more effective purpose would be to "help the company see how my skills and experiences match their organization's objectives and the requirements of the open position."

(Shortform note: In How to Win Friends and Influence People, Dale Carnegie also says that the only way to influence someone is to talk about what they want and not what you want. He explains with a metaphor about fishing: You don’t put your favorite dessert on a hook to catch fish. You attach what fish like—a worm. Thus, Carnegie recommends you challenge yourself to not mention anything about what you personally want. Instead, ask yourself, “What can the other person get out of this?”)

2. Focus on behavior, not results. The ultimate outcome of the negotiation is out of your control. So, instead of focusing your efforts on getting a specific outcome, concentrate on your actions and behaviors during the negotiation. Set process-oriented goals, such as inviting your counterpart to say “no” instead of result-oriented goals, like getting a specific deal. Camp contends that if you focus on your behavior, the results you want will naturally follow.

(Shortform note: Focusing only on what you can control is a core tenet of Stoicism, which is a philosophy for living a good life by maximizing happiness and minimizing unhappiness. In A Guide to the Good Life, William B. Irvine explains that when you focus on what you can’t control, you give up control of your happiness. He adds that in life, you have full control, partial control, or no control in any given situation. While you can put effort into things you have partial control over (like negotiations), you should only set goals regarding things that are fully under your control. If you set result-oriented goals, you’ll cause yourself more anxiety that can hinder your ability to do your best work.)

Create an Agenda for Every Step of the Negotiation

Camp suggests you prepare for your negotiation by creating agendas—lists of items you want to discuss with your counterpart—for each stage of the negotiation. A well-prepared agenda ensures you communicate efficiently, address all essential points, and achieve what you set out to achieve.

According to Camp, your agenda should include some or all of the following items:

Problems: Everything you or your adversary would consider to be challenges for the negotiation. Negotiators are often reluctant to bring up problems—like a lack of experience for a job position or budget limitations for a project—because they fear these issues could put the deal at risk. However, addressing these issues head-on makes you appear more effective and helps both parties feel more comfortable.

Goals: What you want to achieve at this point in the negotiation. You can think of your goal as the decision you need your negotiation partner to make.

Future Course: What the next step of the negotiation will be. This clears up ambiguity about what will happen next and makes the negotiation process more efficient.

(Shortform note: In Never Split the Difference, Chris Voss also suggests you address problems during a negotiation, but he more specifically recommends you list every bad thing the other party could say about you at the beginning of the negotiation. Voicing problems the other party might have with you allows you to address negative emotions upfront. You can also tap into the other party’s empathy by asking for their input. When you do this, your counterpart feels compelled to reassure you that the problem isn’t as bad as you’ve painted it to be.)

Include Small Talk in Your Agenda

In addition to covering problems, goals, and the next steps of your negotiation in your agenda, consider planning for small talk. Research suggests that engaging in small talk during negotiations can help you achieve better results—and, according to Debra Fine (The Fine Art of Small Talk), planning your small talk in advance can help you keep the talk interesting and avoid not knowing what to say next. Fine suggests you prepare two different items for good small talk:

Questions: Prepare a few questions you can ask to steer the conversation in new directions. You could ask about the other person’s favorite way to relax after work, what they enjoy about the event you’re attending, or whether they’ve attended a similar event before.

Personal Anecdotes: Planning to share some stories or experiences about yourself helps balance the conversation, so it’s not just one person doing all the talking. Plus, when you share about yourself, it helps others feel more connected to you. For example, consider talking about your opinions on restaurants, books, and movies, or your memories and experiences.

Identify the Real Decision-Makers

When preparing for your negotiation, Camp recommends you identify who has the true decision-making power. Sometimes, when negotiating with big organizations, you may not be working with the person who has the real authority—instead, you’ll find yourself working with lower-level employees, people Camp refers to as “blockers.”

(Shortform note: In Never Split the Difference, Voss suggests you pay attention to the pronouns your negotiation partner uses to determine whether they’re decision-makers or blockers. Decision-makers are more likely to use “we” and “us” rather than first-person pronouns—such as “I” and “me.” This is because decision-makers don’t want to tie themselves down to a decision yet, so they deflect by implying there are other stakeholders to consult with. Therefore, if your counterpart uses first-person singular pronouns, it could be a sign that they’re a blocker, not a decision maker.)

To avoid getting stuck negotiating with gatekeepers, Camp suggests that when setting up your negotiation, you try to contact the person with the highest authority first. By doing this, you increase your chances of connecting with the real decision maker right away. But if you get directed down to a gatekeeper, be respectful to them. They might not be able to make the big decisions, but they can still introduce you to the person who can. If you handle the situation correctly, these gatekeepers can transform from roadblocks into helpful guides, easing the process of dealing with big organizations.

(Shortform note: If you’re still unable to get around gatekeepers despite your best efforts, consider doing the opposite of your typical working routine. In Tools of Titans, Tim Ferriss recommends inverting your approach when you’re not getting the performance you want. For instance, when he was a salesman, he called outside of the typical 9 to 5 work hours and was able to bypass assistants and reach executives because, unlike their assistants, they were still working outside normal business hours.)

Let Go of Expectations and Assumptions

To overcome emotions, which can cause you to make poor decisions during a negotiation, Camp suggests you clear your mind of all expectations and assumptions. Expectations and assumptions can impede your ability to accurately assess a situation.

Eliminate Expectations

Camp explains that both positive and negative expectations can undermine your negotiation. Skilled negotiators can use your positive expectations against you by making overstated promises that get you excited and make you feel needy. This can cloud your judgment and cause you to overlook potential pitfalls. Similarly, negative expectations can make you give up on a negotiation or settle for less.

To eliminate expectations, Camp recommends you train yourself to recognize when you have them. If you feel yourself affected by either negative or positive expectations, take a short break from the negotiation to calm your emotions.

(Shortform note: Although Camp recommends you let go of expectations entirely, it may help you to have positive expectations about your negotiating ability, even if you quell your expectations about the outcome. This is due to what David Robson calls “the expectation effect” in his book of the same name. Robson argues that what you expect to be or do becomes your reality because expectations cause your brain to produce physiological changes throughout your body. Thus, how you expect to perform during a negotiation can affect how you actually perform during it.)

Eliminate Assumptions

While expectations can hold you back while negotiating, Camp writes that assumptions—particularly incorrect ones—can be even more dangerous. They cause you to misunderstand people’s intentions and draw flawed conclusions, resulting in missed opportunities and less-than-ideal outcomes. For example, if in a job interview, you assume that your potential employer is more interested in your years of experience than the particular skills you have, you may spend too much time trying to justify your lack of experience instead of promoting your skill set during the interview.

(Shortform note: Confirmation bias can make it hard for you to recognize that your assumptions are incorrect. In Decisive, Dan and Chip Heath explain that confirmation bias causes you to only pay attention to information that matches your existing beliefs and ignore information that doesn’t. As a result, you’ll look for evidence that strengthens your assumption, even if it’s ultimately incorrect. For example, if you believe the hiring manager is more concerned about your experience, you might perceive their questions about a past work experience as evidence for that assumption, even though they’re really interested in how you handled the situation. To overcome this bias, deliberately look for information that contradicts your assumption.)

To eliminate assumptions, Camp recommends you do extensive research and assume nothing until you can verify it with evidence. The more you know, the less you assume. He also recommends that you take notes during the negotiation. Taking notes can keep biased thoughts away and help you listen better.

(Shortform note: In The Culture Map, Erin Meyer writes that when you’re communicating with people from high-context cultures like Japan, where communication requires not only taking words at face value but also reading between the lines, you should explain why you’re taking notes. Meyers says people in these high-context cultures may interpret your note-taking as a sign you distrust them, so you should reassure them that it’s normal in your culture.)

Focus on Your Counterpart’s Needs

According to Camp, your bargaining power increases significantly when you focus on the needs and situations of the other party. Making the negotiation about the other party’s needs reminds them of how much they need the deal. And as we discussed earlier, the more needy someone feels, the more they’re willing to compromise and agree to terms that are beneficial for you. Therefore, Camp suggests you make everything in the negotiation about them—instead of thinking about what you want to gain, focus on what the other party could potentially lose without a deal.

For example, imagine you’re at a fruit market to buy ingredients for a dish you’re making at the last minute for an important family gathering. Instead of thinking about how much you need those ingredients, you might focus on the vendors’ need to clear their stock. This way, you have more leverage to negotiate—perhaps landing a bulk purchase deal or getting a discount for older produce.

(Shortform note: Other experts build on Camp’s advice to focus on the other party’s needs and situation, adding that you should specifically try to identify their walk-away alternative—the best option they have if they don't reach a deal with you. To determine their walk-away alternative, consider what other options they might have to meet their needs without you. By identifying this alternative, you can better gauge how much they truly need the deal and adjust your strategy accordingly—for instance, by highlighting the drawbacks of the alternative. The more unappealing their alternative is, the more likely it is they’ll accept the terms you propose.)

To shift the focus of the negotiation to your counterpart’s needs, Camp recommends two strategies: asking questions and moderating their emotions.

Ask Questions

Camp writes that during a negotiation, you should ask a lot of questions. Asking questions opens doorways to your adversary's world, allowing you to understand the perspective from which they make decisions. When you understand the other party’s perspective, you can guide them toward making rational decisions that are favorable to you.

Camp adds that questions also encourage the other party to do most of the speaking. This helps you discover helpful information without accidentally revealing information that gives them an advantage.

You can also use questions to fuel the other party’s sense of neediness by asking them to imagine what they stand to lose without a deal. For example, if you’re offering a home security system, you could ask, "How many precious family heirlooms can you afford to lose in a break-in?"

Understanding What Others Want: Perspective Taking vs. Perspective Getting

Other experts agree with Camp that asking questions is the best way to see a situation from someone else’s perspective. They argue that perspective-taking, where you try to envision yourself in another person’s position, isn’t very effective. Research conducted across a diverse group of subjects, from students to working adults, found that perspective-taking doesn't necessarily provide accurate insights into their wants and feelings. Even when people tried to think like their friends or spouses (as opposed to strangers), they didn't have much luck guessing their thoughts.

Instead of perspective-taking, experts recommend “perspective getting”—asking questions to gain new information. You can do this by asking for people’s opinions. For example, if you’re selling a home security system, you might ask how the other person feels about the safety of their neighborhood. Their answer could clue you in as to what their needs are.

How to Ask Good Questions

Camp suggests you avoid verb-led questions, such as “Does this proposal sound good?” as these questions typically solicit either a “yes” or “no” answer and limit the amount of information the other party shares with you. Instead, opt for questions that begin with “who,” “what,” “when,” “where,” “why,” how,” and “which.” For instance, a question like “What steps can we take to make this proposal sound better for you?” is comforting, non-aggressive, and encourages information sharing.

(Shortform note: While Camp recommends avoiding verb-led questions in negotiations, other experts say that verb-led questions are helpful for detecting deception and getting honest, straightforward answers. For example, if you're negotiating the lease terms for an apartment, the question "Have there been any reported break-ins in this building in the past year?" will get you a more clear-cut answer about the building's security history than "What can you tell me about the neighborhood?")

For maximum effect, keep your questions simple and concise—complex questions may confuse your adversary and cause the negotiation to lose focus. Camp also suggests you ask one question at a time and truly listen to the response rather than prepare your retort or try to guide the answer in your favor.

(Shortform note: Research shows that people like you better the more responsive you seem. Asking follow-up questions, in particular, increases people’s perceptions of how responsive you are. So, to make your adversary like you better, you should ask simple questions one at a time, listen carefully to their responses, and then ask follow-up questions about their responses.)

Camp suggests four strategies for negotiating with questions:

1. Put your counterpart at ease. Discomfort makes people defensive and less open to what you’re saying, which makes it harder to negotiate with them. To put people at ease, maintain non-threatening body language (like leaning back in your chair) and preface your questions with supportive statements—for instance, “That’s a good point.” You can also help the other party feel comfortable by presenting yourself as less than perfect. Show a bit of struggle or share a laugh about a harmless blunder—for instance, you could admit that you’re slightly late because you struggled to park your car in a tight space.

(Shortform note: Other experts agree that showing some vulnerability can make people more receptive to you, but they argue that you should do so only after you’ve demonstrated your skills and knowledge in some way. In Give and Take, Adam Grant explains what’s known as the pratfall effect: If people already see you as competent, revealing small mistakes makes you more likable. However, if you haven’t proven your competence, people may doubt your abilities and like you less. So, be sure to present yourself as an effective negotiator before being vulnerable about your flaws.)

2. Answer with questions. Respond to the other party’s questions with your own questions. For example, you might redirect a question by saying: “That's a really important point. How do you feel about that?” This technique allows you to control the negotiation, prevent yourself from leaking information, and gather more insight about your counterpart.

(Shortform note: Deflecting questions with answers can help you avoid disclosing information you don’t want to disclose, but it doesn’t come naturally to most people. Because of this, other experts suggest you anticipate difficult questions the other party might ask you. Then, prepare deflecting questions related to the same topic to avoid breaking up the flow of the negotiation. This way, you don’t have to come up with these questions on the spot.)

3. Keep the other party talking. Similarly, respond to implied questions and provocative assertions with statements that encourage the other party to share more information. For example, if the other party says, “That’s a high price for that piece of software,” instead of explaining why the price is justified, you could say, “I’d like to understand why you think so.” By giving them an opportunity to express more details, you gain a deeper understanding of their needs and their position.

(Shortform note: In The Fine Art of Small Talk, Debra Fine says that active listening is an effective tool for encouraging the other party to share more information. Active listening means giving the speaker visual and verbal feedback that you’re listening to them. Visual feedback includes nodding and maintaining eye contact while avoiding behaviors that signal disinterest (like fidgeting, crossing your limbs, or resting your chin in your hand). Verbal feedback includes questions like Camp suggests, but you can also consider paraphrasing and repeating their words to prompt them to elaborate or clarify. By giving visual and verbal feedback, you help the other party feel heard and thus more eager to continue talking.)

4. Triple check. Stick with a question until you receive the answer at least three times. This gives your opponent many chances to reexamine their decision. They can verify if they were right, justify their choice, or change their mind. Instead of pushing them into a corner, this approach lets them reflect on their stance and makes them feel in control.

(Shortform note: Triple checking may be especially helpful when negotiating with people from a higher-context culture than you. In The Culture Map, Erin Meyer explains that low-context cultures, like the United States, communicate at face value, and it’s the speaker’s responsibility to communicate their message clearly. On the other hand, higher-context cultures rely more on actions or contexts that aren't explicitly talked about. So, by asking questions multiple times, you can be sure that you’ve captured all of the nuance and that you clearly understand their response.)

Moderate Your Counterpart’s Emotions

Inviting “no” is not enough to keep your counterpart’s emotions in check. As you highlight your counterpart’s needs, you must focus on keeping the negotiation unemotional. Camp argues that negotiations are more successful when both parties are calm—people make clearer decisions and secure deals that last.

If your counterpart is feeling too negative about the negotiation, empathize with their situation to soften their negative emotions. For example, you might say, “I understand your frustration and would feel the same if I were you. However, let's explore some possible solutions together.”

On the other hand, if your counterpart is overly positive, moderate their excitement with a word of caution. For example, you might say, “Before we finalize, are you absolutely certain that this fully aligns with your goals?”

(Shortform note: In Better Decisions, Fewer Regrets, Andy Stanley agrees with Camp, arguing that good decisions are made thoughtfully and purposefully, which can be hard to do when we’re influenced by our emotions. He writes that the emotions we feel while making the decision aren’t necessarily the same as the emotions we’ll feel later. To guard against this decision-making trap, he recommends asking yourself five questions when making a decision, including “How does this fit into my story?” This helps you think about the future and how your decision aligns with your vision for it. You could even ask your counterpart these questions to help them make decisions more calmly and thoughtfully.)