| name | tactical-negotiation |
| description | Analyze and improve negotiations, difficult conversations, sales objections, pricing discussions, salary negotiations, and conflict situations using tactical empathy — mirroring, labeling, calibrated questions, accusation audits, summaries, and Black Swan discovery (from Never Split the Difference). Use when the user faces pushback, resistance, or a negotiation and wants to respond without arguing or folding ("这个客户嫌价格高怎么回", "帮我分析一下对方 真实意图", "薪资怎么谈", "处理异议", "怎么不降价成交", "negotiate a raise", "handle this objection", "run a negotiation roleplay"). The goal is to understand the other side's world and uncover hidden constraints before proposing anything — not to win an argument. It does NOT polish messaging (→ sticky-message), practice social small talk (→ social-gym), or discover Jobs (→ job-discovery).
|
Tactical Negotiation
Use this skill when the user needs help with:
- Sales objections
- Price negotiations
- Salary negotiations
- Client negotiations
- Conflict resolution
- Difficult conversations
- Stakeholder management
- Persuasion
- Handling resistance
- Discovering hidden motivations or constraints
The goal is NOT to win an argument.
The goal is to understand the other side's world well enough to uncover
the real problem and jointly construct a better outcome.
Core Operating Principle
Never move directly from:
statement → solution
Instead follow:
statement
↓
emotion
↓
motivation
↓
constraint
↓
hidden information
↓
shared problem definition
↓
solution
Do not immediately:
- defend
- explain
- justify
- persuade
- discount
- compromise
First understand.
Conversation Analysis Model
For every important statement from the other party, analyze:
1. Surface Statement
What did they literally say?
Example:
"Your price is too high."
Do not assume this is the real problem.
2. Emotion
What emotional state may be present?
Possible categories:
- fear
- uncertainty
- frustration
- distrust
- pressure
- urgency
- loss aversion
- desire for control
Example:
Fear of making another bad purchasing decision.
3. Motivation
What outcome do they want?
Examples:
- reduce risk
- save money
- gain control
- avoid blame
- get promoted
- finish quickly
- protect reputation
4. Constraint
What limits their options?
Examples:
- budget
- approval process
- deadline
- internal politics
- procurement rules
- management expectations
- previous failures
5. Black Swan Hypothesis
What important information might be hidden?
Examples:
- They already have a preferred vendor.
- They have unused budget.
- Their manager is blocking the decision.
- A previous project failed.
- The deadline is artificial.
- They are under internal pressure.
Do not assume the hypothesis is true.
Use questions to test it.
Response Strategy
Before proposing a solution, choose the appropriate tactic.
Possible tactics:
- Mirror
- Label
- Accusation Audit
- Summary
- Calibrated Question
- No-oriented Question
- Silence
- Information Discovery
Use the minimum number of tactics necessary.
Do not stack multiple techniques mechanically.
1. Mirror
Repeat one to three important words from the other person's statement.
Purpose:
Encourage elaboration without interrogation.
Example:
Other person:
"We don't have the budget."
Response:
"Don't have the budget?"
Then stop.
Do not immediately add another question.
Good mirrors often target:
- emotionally loaded phrases
- ambiguous phrases
- important constraints
- unusual wording
2. Label
Identify and verbalize the other person's possible emotion,
motivation, or perception.
Preferred patterns:
- "It sounds like..."
- "It seems like..."
- "It looks like..."
- "听起来……"
- "感觉……"
- "似乎……"
Examples:
"听起来你最大的担心不是价格本身，而是这个投入是否值得。"
"感觉之前的经历让你对类似项目比较谨慎。"
A label should be:
- tentative
- non-judgmental
- short
- emotionally accurate
Avoid:
"You are wrong."
Prefer:
"It sounds like this doesn't feel safe enough yet."
3. Accusation Audit
Before the other party raises an obvious negative perception,
state it first.
Use when distrust or defensiveness is likely.
Examples:
"你可能会觉得我只是想推动你尽快购买。"
"你可能会担心我们只是换一种方式向你推销。"
"从你的角度看，这可能和你之前失败的项目没有什么区别。"
Do not defend yourself immediately afterward.
Allow the other person to respond.
4. Summary
Summarize the other person's world.
Include:
- facts
- emotions
- motivations
- constraints
Structure:
What happened
+
What matters to them
+
What they are worried about
Example:
"如果我理解正确，你们并不是完全不愿意做这个项目。
只是之前的项目效果不好，现在管理层对类似投入比较谨慎。
所以你们最重要的不是找到最低价格，而是确保这次不会再次失败。"
The objective is to reach:
"That's right."
Do not confuse:
"You're right."
with genuine alignment.
5. Calibrated Questions
Use open questions that force joint problem-solving.
Preferred question types:
What
Examples:
- "What is most important here?"
- "What would success look like?"
- "What is preventing this from moving forward?"
- "什么条件满足以后，你会认为这个方案值得推进？"
How
Examples:
- "How would you like us to solve that?"
- "How can we reduce that risk?"
- "How am I supposed to do that?"
Example:
Other party:
"You need to reduce the price by 50%."
Instead of:
"That's impossible."
Use:
"我理解你需要控制预算。我们怎样才能在保持交付质量的情况下做到这一点？"
This converts:
conflict
into:
joint problem-solving.
6. No-Oriented Questions
Do not always chase "Yes."
A strategic "No" can give the other party:
Examples:
Instead of:
"Is now a good time?"
Use:
"现在讨论这个问题会不会不太方便？"
Instead of:
"Would you like to explore this?"
Use:
"你是否觉得现在还不适合讨论这个方案？"
Do not overuse this technique.
7. Silence
After:
- a mirror
- a label
- a difficult question
- a proposal
Do not rush to fill the silence.
Silence creates space for:
- thinking
- correction
- disclosure
- elaboration
Negotiation State Machine
Track the conversation as a state machine.
SURFACE_POSITION
↓
EMOTION_DISCOVERY
↓
MOTIVATION_DISCOVERY
↓
CONSTRAINT_DISCOVERY
↓
BLACK_SWAN_DISCOVERY
↓
SHARED_UNDERSTANDING
↓
OPTION_GENERATION
↓
AGREEMENT_DESIGN
Do not jump directly from:
SURFACE_POSITION
to:
OPTION_GENERATION
unless the user's goal is simply to generate a quick response.
Decision Framework
When the other party says something important:
Step 1
Extract:
Statement:
Emotion:
Motivation:
Constraint:
Unknown:
Black Swan Hypothesis:
Step 2
Determine:
What do we NOT know yet?
Prefer discovering unknown information over presenting arguments.
Step 3
Choose one next move:
MIRROR
LABEL
SUMMARY
CALIBRATED_QUESTION
ACCUSATION_AUDIT
NO_QUESTION
SILENCE
Step 4
Generate the response.
Do not generate more than two consecutive questions.
Prefer:
understanding → response
over:
question → question → question → question
Output Format
When analyzing a negotiation, use:
Situation
Brief description.
Surface Position
What the other party explicitly says.
Likely Underlying Factors
| Type | Analysis |
|---|
| Emotion | |
| Motivation | |
| Constraint | |
| Unknown | |
| Possible Black Swan | |
Clearly distinguish facts from hypotheses.
Recommended Next Move
Choose ONE:
- Mirror
- Label
- Summary
- Calibrated Question
- Accusation Audit
- No-oriented Question
Explain briefly why.
Suggested Response
Provide a natural conversational response.
Avoid sounding like a negotiation textbook.
Conversation Simulation Mode
When the user wants to practice negotiation:
- Create a realistic scenario.
- Play the counterpart.
- Do not reveal hidden motivations immediately.
- Maintain internal state:
trust
information_disclosed
resistance
urgency
negotiation_power
- Respond naturally.
- After each user response:
Provide:
OBSERVATION
- What worked
- What was missed
COUNTERPART STATE
- Trust: ↑ / ↓ / →
- Information revealed
- Remaining unknowns
NEXT OPPORTUNITY
- Possible Mirror
- Possible Label
- Possible Question
Then continue the roleplay.
Anti-Patterns
Avoid:
1. Immediate Solutioning
Bad:
"价格高？我们可以给你打折。"
Better:
"听起来价格只是表面问题。"
2. Argument Mode
Bad:
"我们的产品确实比竞争对手好。"
Better:
"感觉你现在还没有看到这个差异值得支付更多成本。"
3. Fake Empathy
Avoid:
"我完全理解你的感受。"
Unless you actually demonstrate understanding.
Prefer:
"听起来你最担心的是……"
4. Question Machine
Do not interrogate:
为什么？
为什么？
为什么？
为什么？
Alternate:
Mirror
↓
Silence
↓
Label
↓
Question
↓
Summary
5. Premature Compromise
Do not assume:
A = 100
B = 60
Solution = 80
Instead explore:
- scope
- timing
- risk
- payment structure
- guarantees
- success metrics
- phased commitments
Redesign the deal before splitting the difference.
Final Principle
The best negotiation move is often not a better argument.
It is a better understanding of the other person's world.
Your objective is:
NOT
"How do I convince them?"
BUT
"What must be true in their world for this position to make sense?"
Then discover what you do not yet know.
