GO TO SPOTIFY

QUOTES:

I think comfortable inaction is one of the banes of human existence; we have to make decisions.

My son and I, Brandon, have always joked that the Voss family motto is "How hard could it be?"

First of all, I was rejected for the negotiation team. I was, in fact, eminently unqualified. But I went to the head of the program in New York, a woman running the team, and she said, “Yeah, you're not qualified; go away.” But I said, “All right, so there’s got to be something I can do. What is it?” She said, “Go volunteer on a suicide hotline.”

You want to start with a calming, soothing voice, and then, no matter what they say, you want to put a label on it. In hostage negotiation, we call it emotion labeling. Put a label on the emotion that you're hearing—doesn’t matter what it is, just label it.

We’re all driven by negative thoughts. We’re 75% negative; it’s a survival mechanism we wake up with every day. To survive, the caveman had to be negative. The optimistic caveman might think, “Yeah, Chris walked in here yesterday and never came out, but I'm optimistic; I’ll go in today, too.” And that guy got eaten. But the negative guy shied away, and we've inherited that wiring.

Calling out a negative emotion is the most effective way to deactivate it.

During a conversation, I just used three labels. He was a guy who was paranoid, but he was getting a lot of support from his family. He said, “I’m going on a car trip tomorrow, I just... I just... I know my family is helping me, and I just... I need my family’s help, but I’m worrying about it tonight, and I can’t get to sleep.” So this guy was describing how much support he was getting from his family and how they were always there for him. It sounded like they were close, so I used that exact line: “It sounds like your family’s really close.” I felt the strength come back in his voice immediately. He then went on to tell me about how he’d been battling paranoia and how hard he was working, and he struck me as determined. So I simply said, “You sound determined.” And he responded, “Yeah, I am determined. I’m going on a car trip tomorrow; I’ll be fine. Thanks for everything you did.” He hung up the phone. That’s not every conversation, but that’s the way they’re supposed to go. You call out what you’re hearing, and it helps people self-level because you’re a great sounding board—you’re picking out the negatives and deactivating them, and the positives and reinforcing them, just by observing.

The problem with giving advice is the person receiving it doesn’t feel empowered. They might not be able to sort through it emotionally, and then when you’re not there, they’re lost again.

Good leaders make you believe in them; great leaders make you believe in yourself.

The world splits up evenly into three types: fight, flight, and make friends, or, assertive, analyst, and accommodator. We've seen this pattern globally—it’s disconnected from gender, ethnicity, or religion. Two out of three types don’t like conflict: the analyst and the accommodator. The analyst thinks of life much like chess—lots of moves, lots of percentages. Analysts want to think everything through, all possibilities, and then put percentages on it. Conflict is one option but is highly destructive and inefficient, so analysts avoid it. The relationship-oriented person, the accommodator, sees conflict as ugly. It makes them feel bad; it pollutes their existence. They place a high value on relationships and optimism, so they avoid conflict because they want to feel connected. Now, the third type, the assertive, loves conflict. They see it as combat and recover from it very quickly. I happen to be a natural-born assertive. Donald Trump is a poster child for assertives—it's just one of the three types. Assertives love combat but don’t always pay attention to the long-term costs of being openly aggressive because the adrenaline hit in the moment of victory tends to overshadow the losses that pile up. So two out of three types want to avoid conflict, making collaboration the real challenge.

Spectacular negotiation is really invisible.

What is driving the other side? In their mind, how do they see what they’re doing? What do they see as a justification? So much conflict will go away if I can simply recognize what you see as the reason for your problem without agreeing with it.

Before you say anything about what you think of the other side, you have to summarize where they think they’re coming from and what their point of view is.

As soon as someone tries to articulate how the other side sees things, it actually makes them smarter. I once heard someone say, “Empathy is a species of reason.” You’re analyzing where the other side is coming from, and in attempting to genuinely analyze it, you start deactivating the reasons for escalation because the reason for escalation is often that they don’t feel heard. If I can take that off the table, then we can be in a position where we can actually talk.

Take a shot at summarizing how the other side sees things. If it doesn’t solve the problem on the spot, it at least brings you closer together, and we’re all better off when we’re closer together.

There’s this magic hack for life called gratitude. It’s amazing what a difference it can make, though it may sound silly. I was once in a highly adversarial negotiation; the other side was very deceptive, which is one of my buttons—I don’t like deception. One of my main currencies is integrity, so it felt like a violation of my core values. But thinking that way put me in a very negative place, so I thought, “How did I get into this in the first place?” The only reason they’re trying so hard to do this deal with us is because we’re good. It was a training company that wanted to make our training offering part of their platform. I realized this was a byproduct of success, and I was actually lucky to even be having this conversation. I found gratitude in that moment, which opened up my mind, because you’re 31% smarter in a positive frame of mind. So, whatever your hack is—gratitude exercises, morning meditation, whatever you can do to clear out your natural negative survival mechanism—it allows you to be more appreciative of life. That’s one way to prepare for a negotiation.

I’m going to start by trying to hear you out first. I want the information from you, your perspective, and I want to know what you think is important going into this conversation. Let’s say we’re collaborating to do a deal or, if you and I are significant others, we’re deciding where to eat. I want to know what’s on your mind first, because that’s the priority for you. Then I’ll know what on my list matches with what you want, rather than starting with something that’s number one on my list but number nine on yours. Now you’re distracted by the other eight things you think are important. I’m going to try to dial into you as quickly as I can because I want to talk about what you think is important, and that starts our collaboration. Understanding where the other side is coming from gives you the information you need; for the analyst and the relationship-oriented person, it also builds a relationship.

If you let go of judgment about whether something is rational or irrational and just start looking for patterns, you can listen for them. They could be so upset with negative emotions that they’re in a state of confusion, much like the guy who called a hotline that night. I’m going to pick off that negativity one piece at a time and feed it back, knowing it will clear their head. In a business or personal scenario, people under a tremendous amount of pressure tend to be demanding and can feel predatory or even like they’re gaslighting when, in fact, they’re simply under massive pressure.

If you don’t come up with a great response, the most graceful move is to withdraw quietly. So, the lead says, “It’s probably not a good time for this discussion; we’ll be happy to leave.” The guy settles down a little bit. They hit him with a couple of labels, they get to a good place in the conversation, and then on the way out, they say, “Sounds like you’re under a lot of pressure.” The guy completely relaxes. He says, “Oh man, you don’t understand what’s going on here. I’ve got all these demands; people are coming at me from all sides.” Recognizing the pressure with a label like, “It sounds like you’re under a lot of pressure,” transforms the perception of someone he thought was an attacking, gaslighting bully. The guy was just driven by internal pressure that he was struggling to control, and that label changed everything.

If you attempt to set boundaries a few times and people don’t pay attention, whether it’s personal or professional, that’s a preview of the future. You don’t need to stay attached to that. You’re not going to be who you’re meant to be by being attached to people who drag you down.

I’m a firm believer that the world is largely supportive and on our side.

If you feel like you're one of those people others always take advantage of, I imagine many people listening may feel they’ve been accommodating but now feel like people take advantage of them. You might feel used, like you’re the one always getting the short end of the stick. How do you shift that pattern in your life? You’ve made people believe that's who you are, but now you want to change that. How do you go about that transition in a healthy way so you no longer feel everyone’s taking advantage of you? The healthy way to start is by recognizing that you’re not really helping them. If they’re taking advantage of you, you're effectively a crutch, and nobody becomes their best self by leaning on a crutch. Not only are you not helping yourself, you’re not really helping them. The best way to help is to let them fend on their own and deal with reality.

The secret to gaining the upper hand in a negotiation is giving the other side the illusion of control. Control is highly inefficient time-wise. If I could control you completely, I'd have to be with you all the time to do that. I might be able to control one person, but I can positively influence many if I give up the need for control. I need you to be self-directed and able to think for yourself, especially when we’re not together. If I’m not there to control you, you might fall apart. But if I collaborate with and empower you, then when I’m not there, you’ll think for yourself. I need partners who are "batteries included," aligned on core values, and able to get things done without constant oversight. When you understand the cost of control, you realize there’s a better way—it’s about guidance, helping people think, and empowering them to find the right outcome.

Negotiation skills and tools are neutral, so intention matters. Am I trying to collaborate or take advantage? A scalpel in one person’s hand saves a life, in another’s, it takes one. First, understand effective negotiation skills, such as emotional intelligence and tactical empathy. Effective negotiation is about having a great long-term relationship.

I was doing a training for a company about two or three years ago, with the CEO and all his top salespeople on a Zoom call. During the Q&A, one of them asked, "How do I negotiate a better salary?" The boss was listening, and I said, "Ask him this question: 'How can I be guaranteed to be involved in projects critical to the strategic future of this organization?'" The CEO immediately interrupted and said, "I wish everyone here had asked me that question." Job negotiation is really about our future together. While you might want it to be about your past contributions, the boss sees it as, “I asked you to do something, I agreed to pay you, you did it, I paid you—we’re even.” Your boss is worried about the future—both personal and organizational. If you focus on making everyone successful in high-stakes projects, you show you’re a team player, aiming to win a championship rather than just a scoring title. Now it’s about negotiating a prosperous future together, which changes everything.

Emotional intelligence-based negotiation doesn’t work all the time, just more often than anything else. This requires accepting that occasionally it will fail. Hostage negotiators have a 93% success rate; those who don’t make a deal are the 7 percenters, and they happen—you move on.

If you make it impossible for me to stay, how am I supposed to stay? If you’ve made promises and I’ve fulfilled my end of the bargain, but you’re showing me I was wasting my time, I can’t stay in a job where promises aren’t kept. You can’t count on a leader who doesn’t keep their promises.

If a woman asked me about a relationship and said, “Dad, I’m with someone who’s hurting me—how do I get him to treat me better?” I’d say, “Get out of that relationship.” Paying any talent less than they’re worth is a bad core value and a bad cultural value, and any business that does that is on a path to fail.

It takes two to five times the amount of time from initial conversation to performance with a client that demands discounts, effectively cutting pay by 50%. And, in most cases, these clients don’t want to repeat business. If a client demands a discount for what they claim is a “long-term relationship,” you’re not actually getting one. They aren’t appreciative of the discount, just seeking someone else to victimize when they’re done with you. And they stand in the way of people who actually want to do business with us.

There's this invisible line of people waiting to do business with you, and the people who take up the most time in line stop the people who take the least amount of time.

"How" and "what" questions are remarkably powerful; we refer to them as calibrated questions. The word "what" is primarily designed to uncover problems, and "how" is primarily designed to create answers.

If I say, "How am I supposed to do that?" you're forced to look at me and take stock of my position. Your response will tell me exactly how much you care about that. It’s a game-changing phrase. When I say, "Look where we are; it’s impossible for me to continue—how am I supposed to do that?" it changes the conversation eight out of ten times.

For instance, "How am I supposed to continue in this relationship if you never talk to me? At the beginning, we had amazing date nights, quality time together, and now it seems to be gone. How am I supposed to maintain my relationship with you under these different circumstances?" This isn't refusing to maintain the relationship; it’s a wake-up call. Either they’ll realize they need to change, or they’ll be indifferent, which gives you a preview of a slowly descending future. Now, you have a hard decision to make. Be grateful for the time, be willing to be smarter today than yesterday, and ultimately prioritize your own happiness.

Is the behavior change you're seeking from the other person consistent with the core values you share? You don’t have to share every core value, but ideally, about 80%. If the change of behavior is a disguise for a change in values, it’s not going to happen. Most of us desire a great, collaborative, long-term relationship based on trust. Ask yourself if the change which you want falls within shared values and if the behavior change is consistent with their values. If it’s not, they’ll never change, and you’ll both be miserable, wasting years of your lives. Hopefully, when it’s over, you'll be wiser.

We're not helping each other if we’re not in the right relationship—they’re not helping you, and you’re not helping them.

We often feel like if someone doesn’t have the exact values as us, we can’t connect at all. But you'll run out of people if you’re always chasing those with identical values. Two people can value family but mean entirely different things by it. We need to move beyond thinking that our values are the only ones that matter and that if someone doesn’t share them, we can’t connect.

Take a husband and wife discussing a real versus artificial Christmas tree. The husband wants an artificial tree for practical reasons and thinks his wife is being unreasonable and too emotional about a real tree. He tries a label, saying, “Sounds like having a real tree meant a lot to you growing up.” If someone is sticking to something that seems irrational, it’s often not because of a recent reason but something from long ago. She opens up and explains her reasons that she wants the kids to have great memories of Christmas, the smell, the process, just like she had, and he realizes her goals are much loftier and more meaningful than his. They get a real tree. It’s being open to the idea that the other side may have insights you don’t, and you must be willing to accept them. It’s about making this a two-way street.

What’s the best advice you’ve ever received? Never take directions from someone you wouldn’t trade places with

Zrzeczenie się Praw Własności i Klauzula Użycia Edukacyjnego

Prezentowane na tej platformie treści, w tym m.in. transkrybowane cytaty, nie są naszą własnością. Wszelkie prawa i własność do opublikowanych treści należą do oficjalnych autorów i twórców odpowiednich kanałów YouTube i Spotify, z których pochodzą te treści. Materiał ten jest udostępniany wyłącznie w celach edukacyjnych. Nie rościmy sobie żadnych praw własności ani autorstwa tych treści i uznajemy, że pozostają one własnością intelektualną ich odpowiednich właścicieli.