Chris Voss | The How-To of High-Stakes Negotiations: The Secrets of Tactical Empathy

28:58They get the serotonin, which is a drug of satisfaction, which makes them less demanding and want less. and so the feeling of being heard bonds them to you makes them more honest and makes them less demanding those are pretty good head starts so okay so let's start with oxytocin then because and and then i want to get back to this status which is more dopamine and serotonin so let me ask a question so let's say i was talking to uh uh someone who had taken hostages i'm trying to I could say what you just said, actually, which is, listen, buddy, we all want to be heard. So I'm here for you to say whatever you want to say.

29:39So using the word we, does that kind of trigger the oxytocin? No, it does not. It doesn't. A lot of people want it to. It's well-intentioned. But we is generally a disguise. It's a manipulative pronoun. how people use pronouns are great tells. And it's that in particular, you know, faux empathy, fake empathy is used a lot of time. Like I won't say to you we all want to be heard. I might say, look, you're doing this for a reason. You feel like you've never been heard. You feel victimized by whomever it might be. You feel like you're standing up for the downtrodden, The people have had their rights denied to them.

30:26People have been crushed by life circumstances. People have been crushed by the colonial power that's currently occupying your country, stopping you from having a better life for your children, stopping you from worshiping your religion the way you want to live. I mean, that's how they feel. So the demonstration of understanding is not saying, I understand, we all want to be understood. the demonstration of understanding is actually articulating what they think and so this this will kind of create that bonding effect that oxytocin boost for both sides like every to their side like you're trying to give them a hit of oxytocin that's why you know i made a point of saying it's a one-way bond they're bonding to you and and that's why like constantly in hostage negotiations SWAT guys and commanders are always scared the negotiators are bonding with the bad guy because they see the they hear the bad guy band bonding to the negotiator and they're afraid that it's a two-way bond and the negotiator is always like what are you talking about you know I'm trying to get this guy out yeah but if we got to line him up for a shot that's my job too I'm not I'm not going to save this guy's life at the risk of my ego or a hostage's life because he likes me.

31:45That didn't make me like him. And really before the understanding in early hostage negotiation days, you know, the Stockholm syndrome, if you will. Nobody had any understanding of the neurochemicals. They just knew the bad guys were bonding to the good guys in ways. They figured like, well, last time somebody bonded with me, we were buddies for the rest of our lives. So we must be losing a negotiator's perspective. and negotiators have always been confused by like like like no what are you talking about i'm doing my job here

32:28so like what's what's what's another example where kind of you you set the bonding you said you said that you trigger that oxytocin. So now, like you say, they're more inclined to tell the truth. They're more inclined to deal with you. They feel closer to you. But when I was in FBI New York, I was in a joint terrorist task force and we have an investigation in civilian court over terrorists. You know, the stuff that the Bush administration said, oh, we got to do it in Quantanamo Bay, military bays, military courts, because it's going to be the end of the world. Well, we had a terrorist prosecution in the Southern District of Manhattan.

33:01It wasn't the end of the world. We got a legitimate Muslim cleric on trial for crime. And we've got Arab Muslims. So they're from the Middle East. They grew up in the Middle East. They moved to the U.S. They're Muslims. They're sending money back to their family. And we get them testifying voluntarily in open court. How do we do that? I would sit down with them and I would say, you believe that for the last 200 years, there's been a succession of American governments that have all been anti-Islamic. And then I wouldn't shut up. I wouldn't, but the First Amendment, I wouldn't explain, wouldn't deny nothing.

33:38I'd just shut up. And I'd look at them and they'd go like, yeah. Can I ask you a question? What if their first response is, because again, maybe they've had bad people talking to them before, or they're kind of like all been playing this out in their heads beforehand. What if their response, their first response is, you don't know what I believe. well, then they're going to correct me. And then they're going to draw even closer to me because that gives them the status that you were talking about earlier. Correct. If you correct, you get status. So like, what would you say to get them to correct you as opposed to just being shelled up?

34:14No, I would say, you know, I'm going to throw out what I think their beliefs are. And it's not fake or inauthentic on my part because I never said that I shared that belief. I agreed or I disagreed. I said, look, this is how you see this. This is what you believe. and then they're also used to the argument following it but this is why that's not true they don't get that from me and the you know the the reaction that i just showed you where they're you know they're kind of blinking they're looking around that's the neurochemicals hitting their brain where the shift is going on in front of your eyes and the mere fact that i would take a shot at what they believe and not argue it to them is delightful.

35:05And it was the truth. Like, I got no problem with saying to you what you believe because I'm not judging it. I'm not accepting it or rejecting it. I'm saying like, look, you're a human being, and here's what you see, and I'm not afraid of it. And then what's next after that? So now you say this, but now you want to, again, from a neuroscience point of view, what's your next agenda on your agenda? Well, what I've known that, you know, I've cleared their head and I'm looking for one or two moments. Now, when you approach somebody like this and they don't say anything, what that means is you're on the right track and there's more there that they would love to get out.

35:51They just don't trust you yet. So lack of reaction is actually a very good sign. and knowing that that's what that reaction means, then I'll say, and I probably just scratched the surface because that's the dynamic that's being indicated to me. There's probably a lot more there that I don't even know because that's the dynamic that they're indicating to me in a moment. If I've hit it enough, they're going to say, you know, yeah, I appreciate that. what do you want? But now they're open to finding out what I want because they've signaled to me they're ready to hear it. And I will slowly start to lay out what I think the next steps are, you know, what I'm dealing with.

36:42And in this case, I might say something like, well, my problem is that we got this guy under arrest and we're prosecuting him for legitimate crimes. and my problem is i think there's some information you might have which would shed light on the whole situation because when you start asking for somebody when you start asking for help essentially i'm asking for help but they're used to you trying to make it a shared problem we have this problem and the first time you go with with this we stuff their initial reaction is going to be that ain't my problem that's your problem pal i i like i like how you say i have a problem yeah because after you've after you've kind of built a little bit of a bond you say i have a problem right when they're a little bit more primed to maybe listen to what your problem is yeah they're They're listening to it, and they don't feel you trying to shift it to their responsibility in any way, shape, or form, which preserves their autonomy.

37:54Autonomy is a human existence issue. You know, right after you survive, the very next thing is, are you free? And, you know, they're a human being in the existence of mankind or civilization that was satisfied in slavery. So nobody, autonomy is just on the heels, if you will, on Maslow's hierarchy after staying alive. So if you don't try to take away their autonomy, they're more open to it. So I'm saying this is my problem. Now, effectively, you're communicating that you're hoping for their help, but you're not putting them in a corner by actually asking for it. So again, you preserve their autonomy by giving them the option to weigh in or not.

38:38all right so it's your problem uh since that's got nothing to do with me i'm safe asking you what it is and so we're going to proceed very slowly very collaboratively and so and then you present the problem how do you you know again your goal is to make them feel like the sort of person who is going to help you with this problem well the the goal is my goal is really to make them feel like i'm respectful and collaborative. And that I'm not trying to corner them. I'm not interfering with their autonomy in any way. And that's your highest chance of success. It's not a guarantee of success, but what you need is long-term collaboration.

39:25Like I could manipulate you, and there's a whole theory of interrogation that's largely been launched by CIA interrogators and unfortunately some law enforcement people have bought into it. It's called Eliciting Information. And what it is is trying to get the person you're talking to focused on the short term, make them think that you're friends and befriend them and get them focused on the short term and get them to say stuff to you that's going to hurt them long term. And what that is is a guarantee of the loss of the relationship. I'm very much against eliciting information because, by definition, it's deception from the beginning.

40:12And it works really good short-term, and it just has bad long-term consequences. You know, the rapport-based interviews, the empathy-based, tactical empathy-based, business, personal, professional life, doesn't matter. but won't the eliciting information technique look the same in the beginning like you're going to try to bond and then you're going to try to give respect and then you're going to try to offer dangle some incentive i guess um in a lot of ways it does and you know one of the key issues there and the difference is i'm never going to dangle an incentive i'm never going to try to i'm i want you to feel that i'm collaborative and that you can trust me i'm never going to act like i'm your friend, but I'm going to want you to trust me.

40:58You know, those are, those are two different things. I'm not, because I, you know, I'm, I want you to testify or I want to arrest you. If I'm, if I want to arrest you and I'm acting like I'm your friend and pretend like nothing bad's going to happen to you, I'm going to protect you from harm when in fact I'm putting, plan on putting you in jail. You know, that's deception by omission. I'm, and I'm not into deception by omission so how do you express like let's say you you've expressed you have this problem and then they say look i'm not willing to help you um how do you then do you switch tone like how do you say well look i'm gonna have to arrest you if you don't help me like how do you say that well you know um you talk about two different guys am i am i talking to a suspect or am i talking to a witness let's say a suspect yes or okay you go ahead yeah well you know A suspect, by and large, if I'm interviewing a suspect, you know, the information I'm gathering from the interview, I got an ongoing investigation.

42:01And I'm trying to get a feel for you. And I'm not planning on arresting you today anyway. I'm just going to see what kind of information I can get out of you and then let you go. But if you're under arrest, and I have said this to terrorists, I already got you. I'm not going to rely on the information from you to secure whether or not I'm going to convict you. Now, I'm going to give you a shot at talking, you know, maybe you want to trade your way out of this. This is cool. And this exactly happened in a terrorist case, the prosecution we had in the Southern District. You know, there is a 1990s, right after the first trade center bombing, second terrorist cell is going to blow up four locations in New York City simultaneously.

42:49I'm one of the lead case agents. When we lock all these guys up, the instigator, the organizer, is my guy. I get to put handcuffs on him. I'm talking to him. We lock these guys up. It's about 1.30 in the morning. We're heading for the office. Courts don't open until 9 o 'clock the following morning. We've got to house them in the office overnight. I'm in the back of the car sitting next to this guy. I go, like, look, I got you. We're not going to interrogate you. I don't need you to talk. we've got to kill about eight hours before the courts are open. I am not going to interrogate you. I've got you.

43:30So if we talk at all, it's not to trick you. I'm going to ask you if you need to get a drink of water. I'm going to ask you if you need to go to the bathroom. There's no interrogation. It's in your best interest to not say anything to me at all. I've got you. We're just going to take it easy. I'm going to tell you a couple of jokes. We're going to have a few laughs. You're going to get arraigned in the morning. You're probably going to get released on bond. If you're not, you're going to be remanded. You're going to get an attorney. But relax, because I'm not going to interrogate you. And the rest of the night went down exactly like that.

44:05You know, we kept him in the office. We kept him as comfortable as we could. Stood up in front of the judge following morning. He was remanded in custody, MCC. A year later, he decides to cooperate, reaches out for the Southern District of New York and initially says, I want to cooperate with you guys, the prosecutors, federal United States attorney, Southern District of New York, but don't tell the FBI. And they go like, we can't do that. We got to tell the FBI. They got to be involved. And he said, OK, I'll talk to Chris. and he wouldn't talk to anybody other than me because i treated him with such such respect earlier and i you know i had him under arrest i wasn't gonna interrogate him to entertain me and i'm gonna treat i treat everybody i ever locked up with respect and if they decide they want to cooperate chances are they're going to ask for me and just as an aside do you think there's a lot of terrorist activities that the fbi stopped that we have no clue about oh without question like what what would have happened if there was no fbi for instance like what would have happened in new york city let's say post 9-11 um well like they were after us all over north america and it was actually very frustrating at that point in time in 9 11 at post 9-11 because we went into strict deterrence like which means as soon as you find out a plot is brewing you're going to interdict it and not lock people up you're just going to disrupt it or maybe just lock a couple of them up and a whole bunch of them are going to get away what you're doing by interdicting without arresting or interdicting early is educating them on how you found them.

45:54And we went into this complete shield defense for good reasons. But that I knew of, we probably interdicted 20 more terrorist attacks in the first couple of months, 18 months, two years. You disrupt the organization, you educate them, you move them on, which is the problem with interdiction, extreme interdiction. And it's scary to let an investigation play out. The one where we locked these guys up with the four bombing plots, they had actually been targeting blowing up our building. We were aware of it probably for about two and a half, three months before we locked them all up. We couldn't tell, you know, the federal building in New York, the FBI is not the only agency there.

46:43We couldn't tell any of the other agencies. I remember the senior manager, when he had to go to the other agencies in the building and say, oh, by the way, those guys we just locked up last night, they've been planning on blowing up the building for the last three months. They went, what? And you didn't tell us? But, you know, we were on top of them and we locked them all up. I mean, we took out several cells instead of three guys when we did that and we set them back for years. Well, I'm glad you did. I lived across the street from that building, so you did a good job, soldier. Thank you for your service.

47:21But what's the worst thing that you think would have happened? Was there anything like on the scale of 9-11 that was stopped? You know, there was stuff on that scale both before and after. Right after the first World Trade Center bombing, The instigator was Ramsey Youssef, who is the actual nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the guy who organized 9-11. He's still in Guantanamo as we speak. There was some news about it recently. Yeah. The Justice Department, I think they wanted to cut some sort of, the prosecutors wanted to cut some sort of deal, and the attorney general threw the deal out the window.

48:07But anyway, so, I mean, these are the links between the terrorists. His nephew did the 93 bomb on the Trade Center. Now, he managed to get away and get in, you know, as we would say, get into the wind and then get locked up for several years. He had plotted to blow up 12 airliners simultaneously over the Pacific Ocean. And while in a few years that he was on a run, he was operating out of the Philippines. Two investigators from New York Joint Terrorist Task Force, Frank Pellegrino and Matt Bashir, were hot on Ramsey's trail for several years. And Frank and Matt uncovered the plot to blow up the 12 airliners based out of Manila.

48:48And Frank and Matt's pursuit of Ramsey disrupted that. and Ramsey ultimately got locked up in Pakistan while he was running for Frank. So, yeah, there was plenty of stuff that was interdicted along the way by FBI agents that were just bloodhounds. They weren't giving up Frank. I mean, why do you think nothing has happened basically since 9-11? Like, is it that you're that good? Like, the FBI and the CIA and so on are that good? or is there some level of incompetence on the other side? Yeah, it's a really legitimate question. And, you know, I'm listening to Elon Musk talk about something on another podcast the other day, and he's talking about the tides of history and the captains of the ship.

49:34And it's both factors. You know, what are the tides of history and how competent are the captains of the ship? And then how much luck is involved? You know, shortly after, not terribly long after 9-11, you know, we get into the war in Iraq, and that turns into one of the biggest debacles in the history of American foreign policy, which springs up al-Qaeda in Iraq. And, you know, al-Qaeda then immediately starts going into the kidnapper, murder, public murder and execution business through most of 2004. And I was involved in trying to interdict and dissuade that, and they ultimately got out of that business based on how bad we made them look.

50:16So their business evolved, if you will, through, they got, you know, they were getting all the PR that they needed for a while out of Baghdad by murdering people on camera and putting it out on Al Jazeera. And then they got out of that business, they found out how lucrative kidnapping was, and they're still doing it in Africa. They're still funding global operations from Al Qaeda by the, you know, kidnap for ransom, because they made a lot of money in Baghdad. You know, then the organization evolves and about 10 years after, ISIS springs up. ISIS, the heads of ISIS were the lieutenants of al-Qaeda in Baghdad 10 years earlier.

50:55So there's an evolution of organizations and there's the tides of history. And those of us that are, you know, we're not the captains of the ship, but maybe we're the gunners. We're doing the best we can and trying to keep up as best we can. and so you know again back to negotiation you know what are what you're dealing you're you're you know you were the fbi's leading hostage negotiator what are some kind of tools of the trade that you felt were maybe their tech maybe they could be bluntly called techniques but what are like some go-to techniques that you knew you could rely on you know the nuts thing is you You know, this thing that we call tactical empathy, the demonstration of understanding, like people are not ready for that.

51:39Like, it doesn't matter who you are. You aren't ready for it. You're not used to being listened to. You're used to being argued with, used to being either argued with or followed. But and followers don't listen either. You know, they're drones. But for somebody to actually listen to you without arguing with you, like that's astonishing. That's refreshing. It doesn't matter who you are. And so I did it in kidnap negotiations because it would catch the other side so off guard. Like they never, they were argued, they were bargained with. You know, they were argued with. Nobody ever actually listened to them and fed it back to them.

52:15And these, you know, this oxytocin, serotonin thing, like they're not used to that. And this is wiring that people are born with. You know, there's some interesting conversations going on now about the difference between feelings and emotions. and one set is something you're born with and the other set is something you learn through conditioning. And I think the argument is that you're born with the feelings of anger, sadness, enjoyment. I think there's five or six of them. You're born with them. It's how you're wired just because you were born. And the rest of them evolve based on the way your life evolves.

52:52You know, the detachment syndrome is because you weren't held enough in the first year of your life, whether you're an orphan or whether your family just didn't hold you. You know, that's a conditioned thing. It's argued that many sociopaths become sociopaths because they're conditioned that there are no rules by inconsistent discipline by their parents. So that's a conditioned thing, but that doesn't change that you were born with certain neurochemicals in a limbic system because you're human. And tactical empathy is about, Let's confine ourselves to the stuff that I know you were born with. And you were born with a limbic system.

53:29And in broad terms, it's going to function in certain ways. And if I can trigger your oxytocin, especially if you're used to being argued with, you're going to be drawn to me. You're not going to know why and you're not even going to know it's happening. And it's going to change things. It's literally a magic spell. I feel like, you know, Dumbledore from Harry Potter. You're not going to know it happened.

54:10So like in the kidnapping case, a person has, the other side has a specific agenda. They want money. Right. And they know you've got money, right? They kidnapped someone who they've researched. They know the other side has money. They haven't researched them. They're going to use the negotiation process to figure out what they can get. That's their research. There's going to be a certain set of parameters they're going to go with to begin with. Like for the longest time in Haiti, Haiti's model was carjack a car with more than one person in it. if they're in a car in Haiti, they at least have money for gas.

54:51And Haiti being so ridiculously poor, they have assets. Now, it's your job, because they were in a car, it's a prequalifier. It's your job in a negotiation to figure out how many assets they have. And then what kidnappers globally get really good at is figuring out how much money you have. Like, you could ask for a million dollars, but if they only got 10 ,000, you ain't getting a million. so your job in a negotiation is figure out do they have 10 ,000 or they have a million. And so how do you do that? Well, then the whole bargaining process, like how quickly you're going to give in. And there's a methodology.

55:30It's the Ackerman model. Mike Ackerman, former CIA guy, started a K &R, Kidnapping Ransom Consulting Company. I learned the Ackerman model early on. and I told this Ackerman, I ultimately meet Mike, and I'm like, hey, Mike, you know, I heard you thought this up. I give attribution, just want to know if it's true. And he's like, yeah, yeah, I did. And I vetted it through your buddies at Harvard, and your friends at Harvard told me this model will work under any circumstances. It works because it's a good bargaining model. You know, so what I'm going to do in Ackerman is make you feel like you got our last dime.

56:10and there's a very specific methodology if you get into hard bargaining. Now, I'm going to try to head it off before we get there, and I'm going to use empathy, and it's going to catch you off guard, and I'm going to use deference because it's going to catch you off guard. You're not used to being deferred to. You're not used to me being...

56:35a methodology that exhausts you. It's used to me arguing. People get energy from arguing. Anger gives you energy. I'm not going there. I'm not going to use anger to give me energy nor give you energy. Empathy, in a bare-knuckle bargaining situation, empathy is going to suck the life out of you. Now, let's say these techniques, though, are not working somehow. I mean, I remember in Never Split the Difference, doing things like, well, is there someone I can talk to? You would say to the guy, is there someone I can talk to who can make a decision about this? Or you kind of reduce their status a little bit.

57:17Well, you know, they may ask that of me, but I'm going to be very cautious about their status. So an empathy is a diagnostic. That's what a lot of people don't realize. You know, it's designed as a rapport building and an information gathering process. So I'm going to realize there's a lot of information I don't have and what's going to be my best source, the person I'm talking to on the other side. So I'm engaging to feel you out. I'm using specific negotiation techniques and realizing that every one of your responses tells me more about you and your situation. situation I for a long time we thought about drawing a direct correlation to the skills and sonar because sonar is about bouncing sound off the other side and then reading how the sound comes back to you and so the the communication of verbal communication or however we communicate we're going to read how it comes back to us to give us a clearer picture what the other side what they're looking at, what their timeline is.

58:19Everybody has a timeline, period. It doesn't matter who you are. It doesn't matter what your circumstances are. You have a timeline. And what I need to know is what that timeline is. And then after that, what's your effort timeline? What's your emotional timeline? What's your emotional budget, if you will? And what I'm going to try to do is I'm going to try to run your emotional budget out sooner on your timeline so we get to an outcome positive faster than you originally planned because you spent your emotional budget so how to like like so emotional timeline meaning they're just going to be sick of talking to you after a certain amount of time or well they're going to be exhausted by the process not necessarily sick of talking to you because that's slightly different feeling but they're going to be exhausted by the process and then you're going to you're going to have a pretty good feel of their timeline in advance, and it's going to be based on a local environment.

59:17Like in Haiti, and it's still the case, it's short-term criminal behavior, and they're not fundamentalists of any religion. So what does that mean? The stupid thing that it means is they probably want to chill on the weekend. There's a pretty good chance you want to party on Saturday night. So you're going to settle on Fridays, early Saturday. You're never settling on Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday. It's just not going to happen. So you've got to understand their local timelines based on what their culture is, their atmosphere. It's their environment. It's humans within the environment. Now, it used to be Colombia and South America, they did so many kidnappings, they had this huge infrastructure built up.

1:00:09The last case that I worked, that resolved after i left the bureau there were hostages that were held down there for six years so you know you got to understand what's the infrastructure what's the infrastructure of the people on the other side the columbia the farc the eln they've been in business for a long time they got they got a huge infrastructure in the mountains haiti kidnapping gangs these these dudes living day to day they don't have a robust infrastructure and so how do you reduce their emotional bandwidth like how do they how do you kind of wear them out emotionally well you you know when when they're going to settle when they're not you're going to you're going to know how they're engaged are they are they are their threats are going to be a great indicator specificity of the threats the more specific the threats get the closer you order the end of their timeline like if you don't pay us by 12 noon tomorrow hostage is dead that's pretty specific on a monday if we don't get our money we're going to kill them they've given you no timeline they just make a noise they want to see how scared you are how much money you're going to throw on the table what they would do in haiti on a regular basis or any other country that's into short-term criminal kidnapping you pay them what they want right up front and their response is oh you misunderstood that was a down payment so you can't pay them what they ask you know if If you're selling a car, James, you're selling your car in the U.S.

1:01:38You want$5 ,000 for your car. Dude walks up, takes one look at it, says, you got it. Here's$5 ,000 on the spot. Brought cash with me. It's all yours. Your reaction is like, oh, man, I should have asked for more. Right. Now, that dude is standing right there with you. We're in the United States. You got some obligation. You're probably going to hand a car over. kidnappers you're separated by several hundred miles at least you give them what they want they get time to change their mind they're not accountable like oh that was too easy we're just getting started plus it's monday you already gave me my party money for the weekend we can hold out for two weeks instead of five days because we're funded now so you gotta you gotta make them feel they got the best deal they could just like when you're selling your car at that same dude you're selling your car for 5 000 a guy comes up to you and you're like oh man but you know what are you willing to risk though like let's say you know you're not sure if they're going to cut off an ear or something to prove that they're for real like what's how do you balance the the risks in these types of negotiations plus uh you're gonna you're gonna you're gonna get information on the dynamic of the industry before you walk in the door like you're gonna find out from the state department like every industry has a timeline every country is different you got to find out from previous cases what they're looking at what it's probably going to be on a criminal case without a robust infrastructure it's short term it's always short term always and they're always looking to chill on the weekend and so then you got a couple of other questions what's going on there was a kidnapping gang in mexico on a regular basis they cut off the finger of every person they kidnapped every single person they kidnapped they got rent got ransomed out but every time that was their style it was their mo they chopped the finger off everybody they ever kidnapped like and so victims like my family's gonna pay my family's gonna pay you don't need to cut my finger off and it's been reported to me the guy holding them said yeah we cut everybody's finger off so you you there's a certain amount of minimal amount of research and then as soon as they start communicating with you it's really specificity and understanding what's vague and what's specific and the difference and the more if they say, all right, so if you don't pay the ransom, your son's going to die.

1:04:13When? Well, we didn't say when. How's he going to die? Well, we didn't say how. You know, he could be there for 10 ,000 years. He could die of old age. They've left themselves out. They know they've left themselves out because they don't want to get pinned into a corner. Do you specifically then ask when you try to get specifics or do you wait for them to say specifics? No, you know, there are a lot of other issues. I'm going to institute empathy and deference and genuine questions from the very beginning. And I'm going to let this thing play out because I need to know. I need to get a feel for you.

1:04:50I need to talk to you long enough when I know when you're gaslighting me versus when you're telling me the truth. And if I talk to you long enough, I'm going to figure that out. like what sort of questions like at this you know as far as they're concerned they think there's one issue we have somebody we want money for him and so how do you kind of broaden the list of conversation topics you know what are the legitimate questions the first question is how do i know he's alive like that's a legitimate question yeah there's three legitimate questions and legitimate questions are the other side can't argue whether or not they're legitimate number one how do i know he's alive number two how do i know you got him number three if i pay how do i know you're going to let him go those are all legitimate issues because there are plenty of kidnappers that fake they got the hostage is it legitimate to also ask are you the decision maker no you're going to figure that out first of all the guy you're talking to like there's only one case that i ever worked where we were talking to the decision maker and it was a lone kidnapper and it was the only case they ever had a lone kidnap.

1:06:01I'm going to figure that out based on your pronouns. If you're using lots of we's, lots of plural pronouns, you're influential. You're trying to hide your influence. Just like a great business negotiation. You talk to a CEO in a great business negotiation and this guy goes, look, I got a board of directors. I'm accountable to it. And if I make the wrong decision, those guys are going to fire me. so I can't make the decision because I got to take this back to my board. That board is doing whatever that CEO says. He's just smart enough to not get backed into the corner. So anybody in love with plural pronouns is an extremely influential person.

1:06:45Singular pronoun guy, it's the same as a bartender. You walk into a bar, it's probably the guy's first night, and you ask him, you know, I like Balvenie Scott, So I need a 12-year-old Balvini. And the bartender says, I don't stock that in my bar. It's not his bar. And he's probably not going to be there six months from now. So in any negotiation, if you're talking to somebody who's in love with singular pronouns, they're trying to make themselves more important because they are not important on their side of the table. and this is emotional compensation for them to make themselves feel important.

1:07:29So I'm going to diagnose that. How do you use that information? Well, it makes me smarter every step of the way. At some point in time, I know that whatever I bounce off this guy, he's got to take to somebody else. So I'm like, I'm cool with that. I know what's going on. I expect that to happen. So I'm going to start asking this guy what and how questions. How do I know he's alive? and you know this this poor guy's like how the hell do i know how you're gonna know i'm just here to get money this actually happened in working a case out of ecuador it's the first time we shift over to the how questions like just relentless with how uh pepe escobar uh escapes after 28 days resourceful guy bonded with his kidnappers We're chewing up the clock, giving him more time to bond.

1:08:19His emotional instincts are through the roof. Finally, at the point they're barely keeping track of him, he goes out the back window of a hut in the middle of the jungle, 2 o 'clock in the morning, driving a rainstorm. He knows he's just got to get a quarter of a mile away. They're never going to be able to follow him because the rain's going to wash away his footprints. Go to visit him with his family in upstate New York. Because this is the first time we tried this. And I thought we were going to get him on the phone. and we never got him on the phone. And, you know, I'm doing a hostage survival debrief, you know, psychologically, how did you preserve yourself emotionally?

1:08:53But I really want to find out what happened with my strategy because I thought we were going to trigger him to put him on the phone, and he never did. And he says, you know, it was crazy. They sent this guy to town, and he was supposed to stay in the town until he got a ransom, and then he was supposed to come back out and tell the boss what the ransom was, and the boss was going to say yes or no. but instead he kept coming back out saying yeah his wife's saying how do we know he's alive and i don't know what to do with that what should i do so that for over two weeks the terrorists are thinking about taking peppy to town to put him on a phone now what does that mean we totally disrupted their operation they didn't get mad about it and they got emotionally invested into They're taking care of him and being nice to him because they thought they were going to have to drag into town to put him on a phone, which then created the opportunity for him to escape on his own in the middle of the night.

1:09:49So that's what happens. Your representative with deference doesn't know what to do. And instead of waiting until he's got a package to present to the boss where the boss gives a thumbs up or thumbs down, they start collaborating far sooner. and you create a dynamic that's in your favor among your adversaries on the other side. So someone listening to this, let's say, and they're thinking about it in the context of their own lives, like let's say they're negotiating a merger or a salary or whatever, like how do they take this? So it's not a life and death situation, but how do they take this? So yes, the tactical empathy, like bonding, show the other person you're listening that they're being heard or understood.

1:10:41And then how do you kind of veer it towards an outcome that you would desire? Well, yeah. First of all, you're collaborative. And there's a difference between being collaborative and cooperative. Cooperative is your passive. Collaborative is your player. You're involved. and then you said it's not a life and death situation like james you got an amygdala in a limbic system you were born with it and it's from the caveman and your limbic system doesn't know the difference between the caveman being chased by a saber-toothed tiger or you being yelled at by an adversary so we've all got that it's a caveman response and our your limbic system does not know the difference.

1:11:28So the emotional reactions are always the same. And that's why this always works. Or this, why the emotional reactions are always the same. That's why this works more than anything else does. And there's a fine line between that distinction that I made. But it's entirely the same. People want to be collaborated with. They want to be involved. And they have the same basic fears. and so you can begin to do that with deference and you can start to trigger the other side's inclination towards you by how you approach them and you shorten the timeline nothing affects deal timelines like relationships so it's either going to be an accelerator or it's going to be friction and empathy is an accelerator so you're going to get to your deal sooner with these same techniques because they were born with a limbic system that has reacted for the same way since the dawn of civilization according to elon musk about 5 500 years ago i think so treating them with deference but then again like okay you say i have a problem you know my problem is you know i'm trying to figure out how to value my company and so that we can merge or i'm trying to figure out how all the pieces are going to connect when these two companies come together or i'm trying to figure out how to be the strategic you know lead for this project but still make ends meet and blah blah blah like how do you kind of you know and then they're listening to you is there do you sort of just assume they're going to kind of meet you halfway or or is there any way to kind of like jog that along well yeah yeah um a couple things in there that i love that you asked me like meet me halfway like that it never split the difference always collaborate so halfway may not be the best outcome so how do i find the best outcome um i'm gonna say all right so before i present my case let me see if i could summarize how you feel about this here's how you see this situation.

1:13:42Now what's going to happen is I'm going to, if I hit the bullseye, bang, oxytocin, serotonin, all the advantages that gives me. You bond to me, you're more honest with me, you want less. If I miss the bullseye and you correct me, the thing that you talked about earlier is I'm triggering status with you. You're mentoring me, you're helping me. now we're also out of the adversarial position there's nothing more satisfying than correction like it's insane and so it's to my favor to really wrap my brain about that because people hate to be corrected they're embarrassed by it they'd rather die than be embarrassed but empathy is about the other side and the other side loves to correct they're helping me they're mentoring me so i'm going to start throwing out a summary and what I get wrong, you're going to correct me because it feels so good.

1:14:39And that dynamic works in my favor also. And then the great thing about the correction, like your idea may be better than mine. I need to know what you got. You've got stuff I don't know. I got stuff you don't know. I'm hiding information that's important to me. So are you. If we could just lay our cards on the table, we'd come up with something extraordinary, but we're both afraid of being exploited. So what do I want to do? I want to engage in behavior that's going to give me the best chance that you'll lay your cards on the table first. And that's what correction, serotonin, summary, you know, all these woo-woo empathy skills, they're actually incredibly powerful.

1:15:22And so once, okay, once you say something and they've corrected you, but now you still want the merger to go through at the highest possible valuation, or you still want the highest possible salary. Like what's next to kind of, again, get them to help you close this deal? Well, all right. So what are the first principles why I get away with this? Like one of my currencies is authenticity. and I believe in long-term relationships, prosperity. And not only am I going to state that, but you're going to feel that based on everything that I say. So if my goal is for you and me to prosper together for the next 20 years, and it is, then you're going to start opening it up to me.

1:16:12You're going to get out of short-term thinking, quarterly profits, and you're going to start thinking about a 20-year long tail of prosperity. And it begins to change your valuation. So then, you know, let's say we've negotiated in good faith and I still don't like the deal. For me, for my company, what we do, I will say, look, I can't make this deal. And here's why you want what you want. And you're entitled to that. Now, here's what I have to have in order for us to have a 20-year run together, where 20 years from now, we both look back on this and go like, this is the best deal I ever made.

1:16:58What I'm doing is I'm not backing you into a corner, but I'm showing you what prosperity looks like with me so that you say yes or no. I never leave my business partners wondering how we could have made a deal. every time we get close to the finish line there's never going to be any doubt in your mind what i'm after because i never want to be in a position where five years later you say oh my god if you just told me i could have done that i didn't know so i'm i'm a believer in authenticity and long-term relationships and this works out really well for me i made some great deals i made a deal once where I said, as is, I'll sign.

1:17:40Understand when I get ready to tell you what I'm going to tell you, you don't have to give it to me. I'm going to sign the deal that you put in front of me right now, as is. Here's where it fell short. And every single time they've gone back and they've either met that condition or they improved something because I'm not holding the gun to their head. I said, look, I'll sign it right now. Make no mistake. I'm not, I'm not taking you hostage over this. I'm not holding a gun to your head. But if I don't tell you, then you can blame me for not telling you. And I never want to be in that position.

1:18:15That's really brilliant because they don't want you to resent the deal afterwards. So, and now you've built this relationship, so they don't want you to be resentful. And it's a two-way street. Yeah. And resentment is expensive. yeah so fascinating the whole aspects of negotiation are really fascinating and you've been the expert on this for for so long again i i so appreciate your book i always still refer to it i've written about it uh never split the difference and now this documentary is amazing yeah let's talk about it a little bit can we because you know your friend of mine nick nanton emmy emmy winning director yeah so so so i mean this kind of this documentary sort of follows your career and the things you've learned are different aspects of your career right it's on amazon people can see it on amazon as we speak and nick did a great job uh you know it it's it it does goes it shows i'm from iowa it touches on can city time and a small town boy from iowa and then some significant cases that shaped uh my thinking on negotiation they're not all good if anybody tells you they succeed all the time they're lying to you and also some kind of historic historically important cases like the george schweig case you cover and like how we touch on that police could escalate or de-escalate from there um there was an interesting thing mentioned at the end where you say how anger lowers IQ.

1:19:48And so you don't want either side, like you don't want to be angry because then both sides are going to end up being angry and just the negotiations falling apart or negotiation is falling apart because everyone just loses IQ. Yeah. And I didn't realize until somebody mentioned this to me just two days ago, not only does anger give you IQ, but it also lowers your IQ and it gives you energy. Now think about that double whammy combination. Like you got more, you're dumber and you have more energy. That's what anger does to you. Yeah. So I mean, I learned so much watching this documentary. I definitely, I highly recommend everybody watch this because you see you in action.

1:20:34It's not just reading about it. Like you see you and the other people that you've worked with, that you've learned from in action doing their thing. and I can't think of a more valuable guide to, visual guide to negotiation and then watching the best in the world do it. Yeah, thank you, James. Did you give me a rating? Did you rate it? Well, I got it, I got it because I did it in the podcast. I got like a link to it. So I don't even, I got to go on Amazon now and review it. I will do that though. It's like, I'm like a Lyft driver here. You know, you know. It's five stars and I'll give you a good tip.

1:21:11by the way i always tell people i always tell the uber drivers i'm going to give you five stars because i want them to give me five stars is that a good strategy or not no i love it yeah you're first of all you're an authentic guy and i'm sure they sense that in you and you know you're leading by with generosity like you you don't ask but you're looking for generosity you're looking for i think it's brilliant i love it all right good and then i want to ask you one more negotiating exciting tactic. This happened to me recently where I was in a small sort of negotiation and someone said this phrase, James, I know you're an honorable man.

1:21:49So, and then blah, blah, blah. He continues what he's asking for. But that impacted me. Like then after that, I wanted to continue to appear to this person like an honorable person. Like, oh, I'm an honorable person. This person thinks I'm honorable, you know, and it kind of like made in the negotiation, as you said, go faster, because I was more sympathetic to his cause all of a sudden. So he like shaped me by putting a definition around me. Well, you know, what he did, what is he called out a positive emotion and or a positive feeling or a positive attribute. And that tends to reinforce it. And my words are very carefully chosen.

1:22:35I said, tends to. Now, the other thing that went into this context between your interactions was you've already got a gun instinct reaction to this guy. So your supercomputer, your instinct is giving you a read on whether or not this is manipulation or genuine. I see. Because he was a friend anyway, so it tended to work better. if you if it was just a plain negotiation where he didn't i had a sense he didn't really know me that well it might have had a negative effect your guard would have been up more you would have had as much of an instinctive feel for this person and your supercomputer instinct i mean is is everybody's instinct is good it's whether we're listening to our instinct or our amygdala is a question and that that's triggering you had an instinct on him and then he labeled a positive and it tends to reinforce the positives.

1:23:34Well, Chris Voss, Tactical Empathy, the documentary on Amazon, done by my buddy, Nick Nanton, who's such a great director, producer of documentaries, everything. He's such a good human being. And the fact that he even did a documentary on you, Chris, says something about you. I know all the subjects of his documentaries, they're all like great people, except for me. But that's... Not true. Not true. Not true. So thanks so much for coming on the podcast again. Great to have you. And I hope you come on again sometime soon. James, my pleasure. Thank you for having me on.

1:24:30Thank you.