Chapter 10: Find the Black Swan

← Chapter 9 | Never Split the Difference - Book Summary

---

Summary

On June 17, 1981, William Griffin walked out of his parents' home in Rochester, killed his mother and a handyman, wounded his stepfather, and marched two blocks to a bank where he took nine employees hostage. Over the next three and a half hours he shot multiple bystanders and a hostage — Margaret Moore, a single mother — precisely on the 3 p.m. deadline he had announced. No hostage-taker in U.S. history had ever killed a hostage on deadline. It was the "permanent and inalterable known known" that made the FBI's framework collapse: everyone knew that deadlines were theater, that what hostage-takers really wanted was money, a helicopter, and respect.

Except Griffin wanted to die.

The clues were there throughout. Griffin stopped answering calls — but hostage-takers always talked because they had demands. Griffin's note rambled about life wrongs without demands — but it was never read in full. Most tellingly: one line in the note said "...after the police take my life..." Nobody caught it in time. A double homicide had occurred two blocks away with no monetary demands — nobody connected it. These were Black Swans: unknown unknowns that, had they been identified, would have completely transformed the negotiation. Suicide-by-cop — a "thing that had never happened" — happened because nobody was looking for information outside their template.

Black Swan Theory Applied to Negotiation. Nassim Taleb popularized the term: events that were previously unthinkable (not just unlikely) that transform reality once they occur. In negotiation, Black Swans are pieces of information each side possesses that the other side doesn't know exist — and that would be game-changing if discovered. Voss's working hypothesis: in every negotiation, each side has at least three Black Swans. Finding them is not a search for big secrets; the information is often innocuous-seeming. Neither side may understand its importance. It just hasn't been connected.

Uncovering Black Swans requires a shift in mindset from "confirm what I know" to "find what I don't know I don't know." Standard research confirms known unknowns. Black Swan hunting requires open, intuitive, face-to-face listening — the kind that notices what's said at the edges, before and after formal interactions, during interruptions, in hesitations, in the things that don't quite add up.

Three Types of Leverage. Black Swans derive their negotiating power from the leverage they create. Leverage has three types:

• Positive Leverage: Your ability to provide — or withhold — what the other side wants. The moment a buyer says "I want to buy your business," positive leverage shifts: you now control something they desire. Experienced negotiators delay making offers precisely to avoid giving up positive leverage before they know what the other side wants.

• Negative Leverage: Your ability to make the counterpart suffer. Based on threats; operates through loss aversion. The most effective form is subtle — labeling the potential negative consequence rather than stating it as a threat: "It seems like you strongly value the fact that you've always paid on time." Direct threats are nuclear — they create toxic residue and may strip away your counterpart's autonomy, causing them to behave irrationally or shut down entirely. Negative leverage exists in many forms beyond money: reputation, relationships, time, access.

• Normative Leverage: Using the other party's own norms, standards, and publicly stated values against their behavior. If your counterpart has said they value long-term relationships, invoke that when they try to cut you short. Nobody wants to be seen as a hypocrite. "Know their religion" to find normative leverage.

Know Their Religion. The Dwight Watson case: a North Carolina tobacco farmer who drove his tractor into a Washington D.C. reflecting pool and threatened to detonate "organophosphate" bombs, throwing the capital into lockdown for forty-eight hours. Voss was deployed to negotiate.

Rather than arguing Watson out of his position, Voss spent the entire standoff excavating Watson's worldview. Watson was a veteran of the 82nd Airborne — veterans had rules. He had learned that if trapped behind enemy lines, you could withdraw with honor if reinforcements didn't arrive within three days. But not before. This gave the negotiators articulated rules to hold him to — and crucially, the fact that he could withdraw also implied he wanted to live. Voss and team emphasized that Watson had already made national news and that if he wanted his message to survive, he needed to survive.

Then FBI agent Winnie Miller, listening intently to subtle references Watson had been making, identified that he was a devout Christian. She proposed framing the next morning as the "Dawn of the Third Day" — the day Christians believe Christ left the tomb. If Christ came out on the Dawn of the Third Day, why not Watson? This was normative leverage through religious framing — using Watson's own worldview to position surrender as honor rather than defeat. When the negotiator mentioned the Dawn of the Third Day, Watson went silent, then said: "I'll come out." And he did.

The Similarity Principle. People trust and concede to those they perceive as similar. Club memberships, college affiliations, shared vocabulary, even similar dress — all increase trust and rapport. In one case, a born-again Christian CEO kept dropping references Voss recognized as religious. At the right moment, Voss said: "This is really stewardship for you, isn't it?" The CEO's voice strengthened: "Yes! You're the only one who understands." He hired them on the spot. The word "stewardship" — a concept from Christian theology about managing God's resources responsibly — created a flash of perceived similarity that closed the deal. Why "They're Crazy" Is Never the Right Conclusion. The chapter's third major teaching: when counterpart behavior seems irrational, it is almost always explained by one of three factors:

• They are ill-informed. They're acting on bad data. Your job is to identify what they don't know and supply the correct information. A fired employee who insisted on suing for $130,000 in commissions he was owed dropped the suit after an outside accounting firm confirmed he actually owed the company $25,000.

• They are constrained. They want to do something but can't — legally, politically, contractually, or reputationally. The Coca-Cola contact who went silent wasn't being irrational; his internal division had been reorganized and he'd lost influence, making him unable to admit he was now the wrong person. The only way to uncover this was face-to-face dinner where he eventually admitted it.

• They have other interests. Their actual motivation has nothing to do with the stated issue. They may be deferring a purchase to protect a bonus. They may be opposing a deal because they feel slighted. The employee who quit before bonus season didn't do it for money — fairness was the actual currency. Griffin didn't want ransom — he wanted death. Find the hidden interest.

Get Face Time and Observe Unguarded Moments. Black Swans almost never reveal themselves via email. Email gives counterparts too much time to recenter and avoid disclosure. The best intelligence comes from: (1) the first few minutes before formal interaction begins, (2) the last few moments as everyone is leaving, (3) interruptions where someone breaks ranks, (4) meals and casual encounters outside structured negotiation. Reporters never turn off their recorders because the best material comes at the beginning and end of an interview. The Charleston business Case. An MBA student doing due diligence on a $4.3 million mixed-use property near a university campus used labels and calibrated "How/What" questions to probe a broker. One mislabeled observation triggered the broker to correct him, revealing the key Black Swan: the seller owned underperforming properties in Atlanta and Savannah and needed to liquidate the Charleston building to cover other mortgages. The seller was under acute financial constraint. That Black Swan justified an extreme anchor of $3.4 million; the seller countered at $3.7 million — below the student's original target. Final price: $3.6 million on a $4.3 million asking price. The Appendix: Prepare a Negotiation One Sheet. Voss closes the book with a preparation framework in five sections:

• Goal — write down your best-case outcome only (not BATNA); this primes your psychology for the optimistic end
• Summary — articulate the situation in a way your counterpart would confirm with "That's right"
• Labels/Accusation Audit — prepare 3-5 labels anticipating counterpart's objections, turning accusations into diagnostic tools
• Calibrated Questions — prepare 3-5 "What/How" questions targeted at revealing motivations and surfacing Level II players
• Noncash Offers — list what the other side could give you that would make you almost do it for free; often these items cost them nothing

---

Key Insights

Unknown Unknowns Are the Highest-Value Information

Known knowns (your research) and known unknowns (what you know you don't know) are both accessible through standard preparation. Black Swans — things neither side knows they don't know — require a completely different approach: open listening, face time, and treating every "irrational" signal as a clue rather than noise.

Leverage Is Always Manufactureable

"If they're talking to you, you have leverage." Leverage is not purely structural; it is largely psychological. What matters is not what leverage actually exists but what leverage your counterpart believes exists. This means every negotiation has more leverage available than it appears — as long as you're actively looking for Black Swans.

"They're Crazy" Always Means "I Haven't Found Their Constraint Yet"

This is one of Voss's most practically useful reframings. Every time you're tempted to dismiss a counterpart as irrational, treat it as a diagnostic signal — which of the three reasons applies? Ill-informed? Constrained? Hidden interest? This question produces solutions; "they're crazy" produces nothing.

Know Their Religion Before You Negotiate

Your counterpart's worldview — their values, their professional code, their actual beliefs — is the most powerful source of normative leverage. Get it before you try to influence them. Watson's military code and Christian faith were the keys to a forty-eight-hour standoff. The CEO's theology unlocked a contract. Most people never look for this.

---

Key Frameworks

Three Types of Leverage

| Type | Definition | How to Use | |------|-----------|-----------| | Positive | Your ability to give them what they want | Delay offers; control timing of desire | | Negative | Your ability to make them suffer | Use labels, not direct threats; handle like nuclear material | | Normative | Using their own standards against their behavior | Know their religion; invoke their stated values |

Three Reasons People Seem Crazy

• Ill-informed → identify what they don't know; supply correct information
• Constrained → dig for hidden limitations; get face time; ask "How does this affect you internally?"
• Hidden interests → ask what they really want; look for the undisclosed motivation that actually drives their behavior

Black Swan Hunting Tactics

• Get face time: email is a Black Swan suppressor
• Observe unguarded moments: before/after formal sessions, during meals, at interruptions
• Watch for what doesn't add up: irrational behavior = Black Swan signal
• Use mislabeled observations to trigger corrections: state something slightly wrong about their situation; they'll correct you with the truth
• Deploy backup listeners: "Their only job is to listen between the lines"
• Ask "Why are they communicating what they're communicating right now?"

Negotiation One Sheet (Preparation Template)

| Section | Content | |---------|---------| | Goal | Best-case outcome only; written down and carried in | | Summary | Situation stated so counterpart says "That's right" | | Labels/Accusation Audit | 3-5 labels anticipating objections and accusations | | Calibrated Questions | 3-5 "What/How" questions targeting hidden motivations and Level II players | | Noncash Offers | What they could give you that would make the deal almost free |

---

Direct Quotes

[!quote]

"In every negotiating session, there are different kinds of information. Most important are those things we don't know that we don't know — pieces of information we've never imagined but that would be game-changing if uncovered. These unknown unknowns are Black Swans."

[source:: Never Split the Difference] [author:: Chris Voss] [chapter:: 10] [page:: 216] [theme:: blackswans]

[!quote]

"It is the person best able to unearth, adapt to, and exploit the unknowns that will come out on top."

[source:: Never Split the Difference] [author:: Chris Voss] [chapter:: 10] [page:: 219] [theme:: blackswans]

[!quote]

"The Black Swan rule is don't treat others the way you want to be treated; treat them the way they need to be treated."

[source:: Never Split the Difference] [author:: Chris Voss] [chapter:: 10] [page:: 198] [theme:: negotiationtypes]

[!quote]

"If they're talking to you, you have leverage."

[source:: Never Split the Difference] [author:: Chris Voss] [chapter:: 10] [page:: 221] [theme:: leverage]

---

Action Points

• [ ] Before every significant negotiation, ask: "What are the three things this counterpart knows that would change everything if I knew them?" Then design your questions to hunt for them
• [ ] Build a Negotiation One Sheet for every significant deal — goal, summary, labels/accusation audit, calibrated questions, noncash offers
• [ ] Replace "They're crazy" with "Which of the three reasons applies?" every time you encounter apparently irrational behavior
• [ ] Get face time whenever possible — phone over email, in-person over phone; the Black Swans live in the unguarded moments
• [ ] In due diligence: use broker conversations as Black Swan intelligence operations — ask "What/How" questions, use mislabeled observations, and listen for the thing that doesn't quite add up (a seller who won't hold a 100% occupied cash cow needs to sell for a reason)

---

Questions for Further Exploration

• In deal-making, where you're often dealing with motivated prospects in distress, the three "crazy" reasons (ill-informed, constrained, hidden interest) are almost always present simultaneously. How do you triage which one to address first?
• The Negotiation One Sheet is designed for prepared negotiations. What's the equivalent for unexpected, on-the-spot negotiations where you have no prep time?
• Voss argues that Black Swans require face time. But a growing portion of negotiation happens via text and email. What adaptations preserve the Black Swan-hunting capability in writing?

---

Personal Reflections

Space for your own thoughts, connections, disagreements, and applications.

---

Themes & Connections

• #blackswans — the chapter's central concept; unknown unknowns that reframe negotiations entirely
• #leverage — three types; all rooted in psychology and perception as much as structure
• #religion — the counterpart's worldview; the richest source of normative leverage
• #facetime — the prerequisite for Black Swan discovery; email is a suppressor
• Cross-book connections:

- The "they're crazy" reframe has a direct parallel in Dib's Lean Marketing Ch. 15 troubleshooting framework: when a campaign fails, don't call it a bad idea — diagnose which step is broken. Same logic: apparent failure is a diagnostic, not a verdict - The Negotiation One Sheet mirrors the pre-call preparation process in Hormozi's $100M Money Models sales frameworks — both emphasize preparing the specific questions and frames before the conversation, not during it - The similarity principle (people trust those they see as similar) is the psychological backbone of Dib's brand-building thesis in Ch. 7: selling builds brands because every successful sale creates a relationship of perceived similarity and shared values

---

Tags

#negotiation #blackswans #unknownunknowns #leverage #normativeleverage #positiveleverage #negativeleverage #religion #knownknowns #facetime #similarityprinciple #paradoxofpower