Chapter 5 -
Transform Any Negotiation With These Words
Crucial Facts
In August 2000, the Abu Sayyaf, a militant Islamic group in the southern Philippines, kidnapped CIA agent Jeff Schilling and placed a $10 million price tag on his head.
Chris was then a Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) of the FBI’s Crisis Negotiation Unit (CNU), an elite negotiations special forces unit. Chris was an easy choice for the Schilling case for two reasons: one, Chris had spent some time in the Philippines, and two, he had an extensive background in terrorism back when he was assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) in New York.
Chris’s counterpart was Abu Sabaya, “a terrorist-sociopath-killer,” with a string of cases that involved rape, murder, and beheadings. Sabaya was a cold-hearted criminal who recorded his bloody acts on video and sent them to the Philippine media. His manner of dressing, his love for the media, and his desire to have a movie about him showed how bloated Sabaya’s ego was.
What Sabaya did not foresee was that Schilling came from a working-class family who cannot afford to pay the ransom, and the U.S. government was not willing to pay for it. The objective was to draw Sabaya into an offer-counteroffer bargaining situation.
After several bargaining attempts, Sabaya would not relent. He said that the money he wanted was for war damages, citing all forms of oppression imaginable against the Muslim community for the past five hundred years.
He would sometimes hint at torturing Schilling.
Sabaya negotiated directly with Benjie, a leader of the Philippine National Police's Special Action Force with a sterling record on rescue missions. He spoke with Sabaya in Tagalog, which was translated in English for the benefit of the FBI team. Based on the transcripts, Chris coached Benjie on how to negotiate with Sabaya.
At some point, Benjie wanted to take a more aggressive approach against Sabaya, but Chris disagreed with him. Chris realized that he had to negotiate first with Benjie to get him to agree on a rapport-based approach.
After four months of negotiation, Sabaya still would not budge. He would threaten to harm Schilling, and the negotiators talked him down each time. Chris decided to change course and wrote two pages of instructions to guide Benjie.
Two days later, Sabaya phoned Benjie, who faithfully followed the instructions given to him. As they ended the call, the demand for war damages was withdrawn. Sabaya let down his guard, enabling Schilling to escape from Sabaya’s camp. Philippine rangers rescued Schilling, and safely returned him to his family in California.
Two weeks after Schilling’s escape, Sabaya revealed to Benjie that he intended to hurt Schilling. However, his conversation with Benjie kept him from doing that.
In June 2002, Sabaya was killed in a shootout with Philippine military units.
*******
CNU developed a powerful model for crisis negotiation, which they call the Behavioral Change Stairway Model (BCSM). The model suggests five stages, namely: active listening, empathy, rapport, influence, and behavioral change. Each stage attempts to increase the level of trust and motivate more connection. When unconditional positive regard is established, then the negotiator can start to influence the other party.
What were Chris’s instructions that allowed Benjie to influence Sabaya?
  1. Pause for emphasis to get Sabaya to keep on talking until all emotions were drained from the dialogue.
  2. Use minimal encouragers, such as, “Yes,” “OK,” “I see” to make Sabaya know that he had Benjie’s full attention.
  3. Mirror. Avoid arguing with Sabaya. Instead, listen and repeat what Sabaya said.
  4. Label. Identify how Sabaya felt and give it a name.
  5. Paraphrase. Repeat what Sabaya said, but this time, using Benjie’s words to convey that Benjie understood what Sabaya said.
  6. Recap. Express the meaning of what was said and acknowledge the underlying emotions. Benjie had to completely summarize Sabaya's rant on war damages, fishing rights, and five hundred years of oppression so that Sabaya's only possible response would be "That's right."
“You’re right” produces a different behavior than “That’s right.” Negotiators work towards the “That’s right” response.
When a person tells you "you're right," chances are they only agree to keep you off their back; they do not own the decision and therefore, are not committed to action.
Key Lessons
The parties involved in a negotiation have their respective objectives and motivations. The artificial “yes” and “you’re right” that are delivered early in the interaction will not reach an understanding between the parties.
It is only when the negotiator shows a real understanding of the other party’s dreams and feelings can behavioral change take place.
Take note of these lessons to break through barriers of behavioral changes.
Learning Activity
Think of a person in your life who is difficult to handle.
Using Chris’s instructions to Benjie as a guide, map out a plan to develop a constructive relationship with this person.