Intro

This segment is called, The One Thing...

If you asked me what's the one thing you should learn from negotiation boss, Chris Voss, it's this:  Splitting the difference is actually terrible negotiation advice.

Conventional business wisdom about finding win-win solutions and meeting in the middle is fundamentally flawed, according to former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss. After years of high-stakes negotiations where lives hung in the balance, Voss learned that splitting the difference is often the worst possible outcome.

"Win-win is one of the most dangerous negotiating approaches," Voss told me in our recent interview. "If somebody uses the term win-win in the first five minutes of our conversation, they're trying to get me to do something for nothing."

This isn't just tough talk from a former FBI agent. Harvard Business School research backs this up. Their studies found that "win-win" negotiators consistently underperform against more assertive counterparts. While collaborative negotiators might achieve B+ results when working with like-minded people, they get absolutely destroyed when going up against what Harvard calls "claim value" negotiators.

But this doesn't mean we should become aggressive wheeler-dealers. The real secret, according to Voss, is something he calls "tactical empathy" - understanding and acknowledging the other side's position while remaining firmly anchored to your own principles.

"The adversary is the situation, not the person you're talking to," Voss explains. His approach reframes negotiation as "great collaboration with long-term prosperity for both sides."

This philosophy has found strong validation in the business world. Mark Cuban, who Voss has discussed negotiation with, emphasizes testing potential partners rigorously while maintaining a collaborative mindset. The goal isn't to squeeze every last penny from a deal, but to ensure both parties bring their A-game to a lasting partnership.

I've personally seen this play out in countless business deals. Early in my career, I'd often split the difference on project budgets, thinking I was being reasonable. What I actually did was create mediocre outcomes that left both sides slightly dissatisfied.

The better approach? Voss advocates for establishing clear value first, then holding firm on price. "Price doesn't make deals, it breaks deals," he insists. "Your salary doesn't make your career. Your salary gives you the ability to pay your bills while you try to make your career."

This aligns with research from behavioral economists like Daniel Kahneman, who found that people react twice as strongly to losses as they do to equivalent gains. By focusing on value creation rather than price compromise, we can shift the conversation away from what each side might lose through concessions.

The most powerful lesson from Voss isn't about being tough - it's about being principled. Instead of searching for middle ground, focus on creating maximum value for both parties. Sometimes this means walking away from a seemingly reasonable compromise in search of a truly excellent outcome.

As Voss puts it: "The secret to negotiation is learning to exhaust the other side." Not through aggression or manipulation, but through unwavering commitment to finding the best possible solution for everyone involved.

When it comes to important negotiations, don't split the difference. Create difference-making value instead.

Support the show