What makes some people consistently get better deals than others? Why do skilled negotiators seem comfortable walking away from opportunities that most people would jump at?
In his book Start With No, Jim Camp reveals a counterintuitive approach to gaining negotiating power: being willing to say “no.” Rather than rushing to secure agreements, Camp shows how embracing “no” can lead to stronger deals and better outcomes.
Keep reading to discover practical strategies that will transform your ability to negotiate from a position of strength.
Strengthen Your Negotiating Power
Camp writes that many negotiators are too quick to say “yes” out of their eagerness to secure a deal and achieve a win-win outcome. But he warns that, when you reach an agreement swiftly, you might overlook important details about the situation and leave value on the table. Camp argues that, to get better deals, you must be willing to say “no.” Camp writes that being willing to say “no” strengthens your negotiating power in two ways: It makes you both feel and appear less needy.
Feeling needy makes it harder for you to walk away from a negotiation, which makes you more likely to accept mediocre offers. For example, you might accept a job offer with a lower salary than you hoped for because you feel desperate for employment. But, if you’re open to saying “no” and able to overcome this sense of need, you can walk away and seek better opportunities.
Appearing needy can make you vulnerable to manipulation by the other party, who might use your eagerness to reach an agreement to their advantage. For example, imagine you’re buying a vintage motorcycle. If you appear too eager or hasty to make the purchase, the seller may realize how much you want the bike and stick to a higher price, assuming you’re willing to pay more for it. However, if you approach the negotiation with a cool demeanor and give off the impression that you could walk away if the price isn’t right, the seller may be more willing to negotiate down.
(Shortform note: Practicing the Buddhist concept of non-attachment can help you combat your feeling of neediness during negotiations, and therefore your appearance of neediness. Non-attachment means not letting people, things, or results control your actions or emotions. To practice non-attachment, recognize that everything changes and nothing lasts forever. When you cling too much to a certain outcome, you lose control: You dedicate all your actions to getting that outcome and feel upset if the situation turns out differently. By practicing non-attachment, you’ll be less glued to a single result and recognize that other opportunities and good things will come your way.)
Camp writes that saying “no” is a powerful way to signal that you’re not needy. It shows that you’re willing to walk away if the terms aren’t right. This puts you in a stronger bargaining position, as the other side realizes they may need to make concessions to keep you at the table. Camp recommends several strategies to improve your ability to say “no” and reduce your neediness, including distinguishing wants from needs, eliminating needy cues, and managing your costs.
Distinguish Wants From Needs
Camp urges you to recognize that most things you think are needs are actually wants. With this in mind, be flexible, realize that other deals will come your way, and approach negotiations with a willingness to walk away. This tactic not only gives you a sense of control but also sends the message that you’re not desperate to secure a deal.
(Shortform note: But what if you really do need a deal and the other side knows it? In Give and Take, Adam Grant says that if your position is clearly weaker than the other party’s, you should simply ask the other party for advice on what you should do. When you ask for advice, the advice giver feels important and more involved in your situation, which makes them more likely to help you. Also, when giving advice, the advice giver must clarify details and see things from your perspective, which gives you more information to negotiate with and increases their empathy for your situation.)
Eliminate Needy Cues
Camp suggests you avoid giving off needy cues by speaking slowly and using a low tone. Using a loud voice, a high pitch, or talking quickly can signal excitement and neediness. You can also convey indifference by displaying non-desperate body language—lean back and maintain a relaxed body posture.
Similarly, avoid using overly formal or deferential language; instead, make requests that sound less enthusiastic. For example, if you’re seeking an investment for a startup, rather than approaching a potential investor with, “Mr. Williams, I believe our project aligns with your interests. Could I have ten minutes of your time?” you might say, “Tim, we thought it might be worthwhile to see if our project piques your interest, but we’re not sure. Let’s explore this possibility. What’s the best time for you?”
| Additional Tips to Conquer Neediness In Pitch Anything, Oren Klaff agrees with Camp that displaying neediness will make it harder for you to get a good outcome when negotiating with others. He says you should be especially careful about giving off needy cues in the first two minutes after you’ve laid out your offer and are waiting to hear their response. Klaff discusses how to avoid two other needy cues: Announce your time frame for the negotiation. Klaff suggests telling the other side that you have somewhere to be after your meeting and when you have to leave. Then, near the end of your negotiation, remind them again of your time constraints. Doing so will make you seem confident and valuable. Let them break the silence. If your counterpart is silently thinking over something you’ve said, wait calmly for them to say something. Avoid breaking the silence with a question such as “How does that sound?” as this makes you seem needy. |
Manage Your Costs
Camp suggests you combat neediness by carefully managing how much time, energy, money, and emotion you put into a negotiation. He explains that the more resources you invest in a negotiation, the more you’ll feel the need to make a deal. Seasoned negotiators may try to exploit this by deliberately exhausting you of these resources—for instance, by postponing your meeting until the last minute or holding it in a high-end, expensive location.
(Shortform note: In The Art of Thinking Clearly, Rolf Dobelli refers to this phenomenon, where investing more time, energy, money, and emotion into something makes you value it more, as the sunk cost fallacy. He explains that people don’t like to admit they’re wrong, so instead of admitting they’ve wasted resources, they often invest more in hopes that the situation will turn out the way they wanted and thus justify their previous actions. To overcome the sunk cost fallacy, Dobelli recommends that you forget about past investments and make decisions based only on the current situation and the future.)
To avoid getting tricked into investing more resources, Camp suggests you set pre-defined limits on the amount of time, energy, money, and emotional investment you’re willing to commit to a deal. By doing so, you avoid becoming overly invested and maintain the ability to walk away if the terms aren’t favorable.
(Shortform note: Camp discusses how you can avoid feeling needy as you invest resources in a negotiation, but how can you turn this tactic around to get more out of a deal? In You Can Negotiate Anything, Herb Cohen recommends what he calls the nibble tactic: After getting your negotiation partner to sink time and energy into the negotiation and to agree to a deal, make another small demand. He explains that most people are more willing to give in to your extra demand than throw away the deal entirely after they’ve invested so much into it.)
Ask Your Counterpart to Say “No”
Camp writes that there’s another way you can employ “no” in a negotiation to further increase your power: Invite your counterpart to say “no.” While this may seem counterintuitive, he argues that encouraging your counterpart to say “no” can get you better deals because it signals that you’re not needy, lowers the other party’s defenses, encourages rational (instead of emotional) thinking, and invites further discussion.
(Shortform note: Inviting “no” may be especially important if your counterpart is what Chris Voss, in Never Split the Difference, calls a “Giver.” Voss defines three types of negotiators (Givers, Calculators, and Aggressors) and explains that Givers are people-pleasers who often agree to things they can’t follow through on because they want to make you happy. By helping Givers feel comfortable saying “no,” you can ensure that they’re not insincerely saying “yes” and that they’re agreeing to something they’ll deliver, leading to a more solid deal for both parties.)
Signaling That You’re Not Needy
Camp writes that, when you ask the other side to say “no,” you signal that you’re not needy. You show that you’re not willing to do whatever it takes or to make sacrifices to secure a deal, which puts you in a position of strength. The other party recognizes that you’re willing to walk away, so they may be more inclined to make some concessions.
For example, if you’re negotiating a job offer, telling the employer it’s okay to decline your salary request shows you’re confident in your value and have other options.
(Shortform note: Camp’s advice to invite “no” to appear non-needy doesn’t apply just to negotiations—it’s also crucial in the context of dating and relationships. In Models, Mark Manson argues that women are attracted to men who embody “non-neediness.” Although Manson doesn’t advise inviting rejection, he encourages you to show that you’re not afraid of it by freely expressing your own feelings and opinions even if they differ from your conversational partner’s. Just as inviting “no” in a negotiation shows you have other options and aren’t desperate for a deal, demonstrating that you’re open to rejection communicates that your sense of self doesn’t depend on others’ approval. This, in turn, makes you appear more attractive.)
Lowering Defenses
Camp argues that asking your counterpart to say “no” often makes them more likely to agree to your terms because it lowers their defenses. By explicitly inviting “no” as an acceptable answer, you create a more comfortable environment for honest communication and make your counterpart feel in control. This approach contrasts with traditional negotiation tactics that pressure parties to reach a quick “yes,” which Camp argues can lead to superficial agreements that may not stand the test of time. Instead, by embracing “no” as a starting point, you can work toward agreements that are both favorable for you and sustainable in the long run.
(Shortform note: Camp’s strategy of inviting “no” is similar to the “but you are free” (BYAF) technique, which is used to persuade people to comply with a request by telling them that they’re free to refuse. Studies show that BYAF makes people over twice as likely to comply compared to direct requests. The BYAF technique works best face-to-face because people feel more compelled to appear agreeable in your presence. For example, it works well for in-person requests on the street but is less effective for email requests where the person decides later. Similarly, asking your counterpart to “say” no may also be more effective in person.)
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 such as, “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. |
Exercise: Reframe Your Negotiation to Encourage “No”
Camp argues that inviting “no” in negotiations helps you strengthen your negotiating power as you can gain more insight into the other party’s position and concerns—leading to better, more solid agreements. Practice building your comfort with “no” and turning it into a constructive part of the negotiation process.
- Describe a current or upcoming negotiation you’re involved in. What are you trying to get out of the negotiation? Who is the other party involved?
- Consider aspects of your proposal that might lead to rejection or a “no” from the other party. Write down at least 2-3 points where you think a “no” could naturally occur.
- Write down how you can present each of your offers in a way that invites a “no.” For example, “If you don’t think this partnership will work out, just say ‘no.’”
- For each point where you anticipate a “no,” prepare a response that helps you understand the reason behind the rejection without pushing the other party into a corner.
