What makes the word “no” so powerful in negotiations? How can getting comfortable with rejection lead to better deals?
Start With No, a book by negotiation expert Jim Camp, challenges conventional wisdom about win-win deals. Drawing from his 25-year career coaching major corporations such as IBM and General Motors, Camp reveals why saying “no” can strengthen your bargaining position and help you avoid mediocre agreements.
Keep reading to discover practical strategies that will transform your approach to negotiations and help you secure more favorable outcomes.
Start With No Book Overview
Many negotiators think of a win-win deal—one in which both parties compromise so that both achieve at least some of their goals—as the best negotiation outcome. However, Start With No, a book by negotiation expert Jim Camp, argues that a so-called win-win is usually a win-lose in disguise because one party unknowingly concedes too much. To avoid these deals, Camp suggests you get comfortable saying “no” during your negotiations instead of trying to get to a quick yes. He further argues you should encourage your counterpart to say “no,” as this can actually strengthen your bargaining position by lowering their defenses and promoting further discussion.
Camp was a renowned negotiation coach for over 25 years, founder of The Camp System of Negotiation, and a former US Air Force pilot. He worked with around 150 corporations—including General Motors, Texas Instruments, Merrill Lynch, and IBM—helping them close deals and negotiations worth billions.
In this overview, we’ll first discuss how learning to say “no” can help you avoid mediocre deals. We’ll then explore why asking your counterpart to say “no” can paradoxically give you the upper hand. Finally, we’ll examine some of Camp’s other negotiating techniques, including how to prepare effectively, keep your emotions under control, and highlight your counterpart’s needs.
Be Willing to Say “No”
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.”
There are two things that saying “no” protects you from: the pitfalls of the win-win mindset and the dangers of appearing needy. Below, we’ll explore why each of these can result in a mediocre deal, and we’ll discuss how you can prevent them from harming your negotiations.
1) The Pitfalls of Win-Win
Camp argues that while the concept of win-win is appealing, it often leads to subpar deals: When you’re invested in getting a mutually beneficial outcome, you’re more likely to agree to deals quickly—deals that are often mediocre or poor.
Camp discusses four reasons the win-win approach makes you more likely to secure less favorable deals:
1. Unnecessary compromises: A win-win mindset can mislead you into thinking that you must give concessions to the other party to achieve a mutually beneficial deal, causing you to give away more than necessary.
2. Unfair outcomes: What one party considers fair, the other might not—and even if both parties consider a deal fair, the deal may in reality benefit one party more than the other.
3. Emotion-driven outcomes: Trying to reach a win-win solution can cause you to make decisions that feel good but aren’t necessarily the best for you. In your eagerness to secure a deal that makes everyone happy, you may agree on a deal that might not actually be worth making.
4. Rushed Agreements: Many negotiators think the quicker they reach an agreement with their negotiation partner, the better. However, hasty agreements tend to have unstated expectations and conditions that only surface later because neither side fully discussed them. As a result, the deal you thought you agreed to may not be as beneficial as it initially appeared. For example, imagine you’re buying a house, and you quickly agree to pay the asking price. You may assume that because you’ve made the process smooth and easy, the seller will also make the process smooth and easy by taking care of a few repairs that were noted during the inspection. If, however, the seller never specifically agreed to handle the repairs, they may not have the same understanding of your unspoken expectation, and you may end up dissatisfied with the final deal.
Prioritize Respect Over Friendship
If you’re focused on achieving a win-win, you may think that befriending your counterpart and finding ways to help them out will lead to better outcomes. However, Camp cautions against letting friendship influence any element of your negotiation. He explains that decisions based on friendship lead to bad deals, as you might leave money on the table or accept unfavorable terms to keep the peace or maintain the relationship. He warns that experienced negotiators know this, and will use friendship to subtly pressure you into conceding more than you need to.
Instead of prioritizing friendship, Camp recommends you focus on being respectful and making logical decisions. Respect and logic build long-lasting relationships, while expectations of friendship can strain relationships. For example, if you overpay for a friend’s low-quality product and later encounter problems with the product, you may feel frustrated with both the product and your friend, which damages your relationship.
2) The Dangers of Neediness
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.
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.
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?”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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, 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.
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?”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?”
