Install
openclaw skills install afrexai-negotiation-masteryComprehensive negotiation system using proven frameworks for deal prep, live coaching, behavior analysis, objection handling, and post-deal review.
openclaw skills install afrexai-negotiation-masteryComplete negotiation system for business deals, salary talks, vendor contracts, partnerships, and high-stakes conversations. Combines multiple proven frameworks (FBI tactical empathy, Harvard principled negotiation, SPIN, anchoring science) into one actionable playbook.
Fill this out BEFORE every negotiation:
negotiation_brief:
context: "[What is being negotiated]"
counterpart:
name: "[Person/company]"
role: "[Their title and authority level]"
company_size: "[Revenue/employees if known]"
pressures: "[Deadlines, budget cycles, competing priorities]"
personality_style: "" # analyst|accommodator|assertive|connector
decision_authority: "" # final|recommender|gatekeeper|committee
our_position:
ideal_outcome: "[Best realistic result]"
walkaway_point: "[Absolute minimum acceptable]"
batna: "[Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement — what happens if no deal]"
batna_strength: "" # strong|moderate|weak
zopa_estimate: "[Zone of Possible Agreement — overlap range]"
time_pressure: "" # us|them|neutral
leverage_sources:
- "[What gives us power in this negotiation]"
- "[Unique value only we provide]"
- "[Their switching costs]"
interests_map:
our_interests:
must_have: ["[Non-negotiable items]"]
important: ["[Strong preference but flexible]"]
nice_to_have: ["[Trading chips — things we can give up]"]
their_likely_interests:
must_have: ["[What they can't live without]"]
important: ["[Strong preferences]"]
nice_to_have: ["[Things they might trade]"]
black_swans: ["[Hidden info that could change everything]"]
preparation_checklist:
- accusation_audit_drafted: false
- calibrated_questions_prepared: false
- anchoring_strategy_chosen: false
- concession_plan_mapped: false
- walkaway_criteria_clear: false
Identify their negotiation style to adapt your approach:
Analyst (40% of negotiators)
Assertive (25%)
Accommodator (20%)
Connector (15%)
Rate each factor 1-5 for both sides:
| Power Source | Us | Them | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alternatives (BATNA strength) | Better alternatives = more power | ||
| Information (who knows more) | Knowledge of their constraints/budget | ||
| Time (who's more urgent) | Deadlines create pressure | ||
| Legitimacy (standards/precedent) | Market rates, industry norms | ||
| Relationship (ongoing value) | Long-term partnership leverage | ||
| Commitment (sunk costs) | How invested are they already | ||
| Skill (negotiation experience) | Experience at the table |
Total: Us [] vs Them []
List every negative thought they might have about you or this deal. Say them FIRST:
Template:
"Before we start, I want to address some things you might be thinking. You might feel that [negative #1]. You're probably concerned that [negative #2]. And I wouldn't blame you if you thought [negative #3]. I want you to know that I understand these concerns, and here's how I'd like to address them..."
Examples by context:
Why it works: Naming fears diminishes them. Unspoken objections fester; spoken ones shrink.
When to anchor first (make the first offer):
When to let them anchor first:
Anchoring formulas:
For SELLING (salary, services, products):
For BUYING (vendors, contracts, acquisitions):
The person who sets the frame controls the negotiation. Common frames:
| Frame | How to Set It | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Partnership | "How do we make this work for both of us?" | Long-term deals |
| Precedent | "The standard rate for this is..." | Rate negotiations |
| Scarcity | "We have capacity for 2 more clients this quarter" | Sales |
| Loss | "Without this, the risk is..." | Upselling |
| Fairness | "I want to make sure this is fair for everyone" | Any negotiation |
| Expert | "In my experience with 50+ similar deals..." | Credibility |
Mirroring — Repeat their last 1-3 words with rising inflection
Labeling — Name their emotion with "It seems like..." / "It sounds like..." / "It looks like..."
Calibrated Questions — "How" and "What" questions that give them the illusion of control
Tactical Silence — Pause 4-7 seconds after making a point or asking a question
Late-Night FM DJ Voice — Slow, calm, downward-inflecting tone
Most powerful two words in negotiation. Getting "That's right" means genuine buy-in (unlike "you're right" which is dismissive).
Steps to trigger it:
Only propose solutions AFTER you get "That's right."
Never say "No" directly. Use graduated responses:
The Ackerman Method (for price negotiations):
Concession rules:
concession_log:
- round: 1
we_gave: "[What we conceded]"
we_got: "[What they conceded]"
their_reaction: "[How they responded]"
next_move: "[Our planned next step]"
When negotiations stall:
Preparation:
Script:
Never say: "I need $X because of my expenses/mortgage/etc." (irrelevant to them)
Preparation:
Script:
Preparation:
Script:
Key principles:
Topics to cover:
| Signal | Likely Meaning | Your Move |
|---|---|---|
| Leaning forward | Engaged, interested | Keep going, make your ask |
| Arms crossed + leaning back | Defensive or skeptical | Label: "It seems like something about that doesn't sit right" |
| Looking at watch/phone | Losing interest or time pressure | Speed up or offer a break |
| Nodding slowly | Processing, somewhat agreeing | Pause. Let them speak. |
| Rapid nodding | Wants you to stop talking | Stop. Ask: "What are your thoughts?" |
| Steepled fingers | Feeling confident/superior | They think they have leverage. Probe: "What am I missing?" |
| Touching face/neck | Discomfort or uncertainty | Label the emotion. Slow down. |
| Mirroring YOUR posture | Rapport established | Good sign — proceed to closing |
| They Say | They Mean | Your Move |
|---|---|---|
| "That's not in our budget" | "Not in THIS budget, but maybe another" | "What budget would this come from?" |
| "We need to think about it" | Objection they won't voice | "What specifically do you need to think through?" |
| "We're talking to others too" | Leverage play (may be true) | "Of course. What would make us the clear choice?" |
| "That's fair" | Possible warning — check if genuine | "I want to make sure it actually IS fair. What concerns do you have?" |
| "My hands are tied" | Someone else has authority | "Who else would need to be involved to make this work?" |
| "We usually pay X" | Anchoring with precedent | "Help me understand — what was the scope of that engagement?" |
| "Can you do better?" | Lazy negotiating — testing you | "Better in what way? Help me understand what you need." |
| "Final offer" | Probably not final (especially first time) | Stay calm. "I appreciate you being direct. Let me ask — [calibrated question]" |
The Rule of Three — Confirm agreement 3 times in 3 different ways:
Implementation questions (most important step — deals die in execution):
Fill this out after EVERY significant negotiation:
negotiation_review:
date: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
counterpart: "[Who]"
context: "[What was negotiated]"
outcome:
result: "" # win|lose|partial|no-deal
our_target: "[What we wanted]"
actual_result: "[What we got]"
satisfaction: "" # 1-10
relationship_impact: "" # strengthened|neutral|strained
what_worked:
- "[Technique or approach that was effective]"
what_didnt:
- "[Where we lost ground or made mistakes]"
lessons:
- "[Key takeaway for next time]"
black_swans_discovered:
- "[Hidden information that emerged]"
follow_up_actions:
- action: "[What needs to happen next]"
owner: "[Who]"
deadline: "[When]"
Within 48 hours of reaching agreement:
When more than 2 parties are involved:
| Culture Type | Approach | Watch For |
|---|---|---|
| Direct (US, Germany, Israel, Netherlands) | State positions clearly, expect pushback | Don't mistake bluntness for hostility |
| Indirect (Japan, Korea, Thailand, much of LATAM) | Read between lines, proposals in writing, patience | "Yes" may mean "I heard you" not "I agree" |
| Relationship-first (Middle East, China, parts of Africa) | Invest in dinners, trust-building, long timelines | Rushing to terms = insult |
| Contract-first (US, UK, Australia) | Get to specifics quickly, lawyers early | Over-reliance on paper; trust matters too |
When you're in a weak position:
The Bully — Aggressive, intimidating, threatens
The Ghost — Stops responding, avoids commitment
The Nibbler — Agrees, then asks for "one more thing" repeatedly
The Authority Excuse — "I need to check with my boss"
Score your preparation and performance (0-100):
| Dimension | Weight | Score (0-10) |
|---|---|---|
| Preparation (research, BATNA, interests mapped) | 25% | |
| Opening (frame, anchor, accusation audit) | 15% | |
| Information gathering (questions, listening, discovery) | 20% | |
| Value creation (expanded pie, creative trades) | 15% | |
| Tactical execution (techniques, concession management) | 15% | |
| Closing (commitment, implementation, follow-up) | 10% |
Weighted total: [__] / 100