3 ms·
No. Splitting the difference could be a term invented to describe this, but it already has a different meaning. It's use is if I offer you two slices and you co
by HWR_14 5y ago
No. Splitting the difference could be a term invented to describe this, but it already has a different meaning. It's use is if I offer you two slices and you counter with a demand for six slices, then "splitting the difference" just refers to using the average value of four.
- tromp 5y agoIt is splitting the difference between Alice offering to take the whole negotiation pie at 10-2 and Bob counter offering to take the whole negotiation pie himself at 4-8.
- HWR_14 5y agoYes, if each originally maximally said "I want all 6 new slices" then it would be splitting the difference in their asks. However, in the case where Bob counters with an offer to split 6-6, it is no longer splitting the difference.
- hackernewds 5y agoNow it has been bastardized by "Never Split the Difference" which is what you now hear from a desperate car salesman now
- nhod 5y ago"Never Split the Difference" is also the name of an outstanding book by Chris Voss, the former head of FBI hostage negotiation. For shorthand, Voss refers to all biz school rational-actor negotiation theory (as espoused by the parent post, for example) as “splitting the difference.” He holds that such theory is useful to know in general, but that real-world negotiations are carried out by emotional, irrational humans. As a result, these rational theories often break down in the face of hubris, anger, fear, love, shame, etc, and as such, relying solely on these theories will not get you the results you want. Thus, you should "never split the difference." Instead, he then goes on to suggest a whole variety of ways one can achieve better negotiation results, starting with the most obvious: really, truly listening to the needs of the other. The book is fascinating. Highly recommended.
- HWR_14 5y agoHow would a desperate car salesman use that phrase?