The premise. Chris Voss's title is the thesis: splitting the difference feels fair but is almost always a loss for the side with the better case. You give 50% of your position to avoid 5% of conflict.
Why people do it. Conflict aversion. Time pressure. Wanting to "be reasonable." All of these favor the buyer, not you.
What to do instead.
- Trade, don't split. Every concession demands a concession. "I can do $45K instead of $50K — if we lock in a 24-month term and you give me the case study rights." Never give for free.
- Re-anchor before conceding. If they push back, restate the value before you move the price. The price moves last, not first.
- Use the calibrated 'how' question. "How am I supposed to do that?" — without anger. Forces them to solve YOUR problem, exposes whether their ask is real.
- Walk away from bad math. If meeting them in the middle destroys the unit economics, the deal is not worth winning. The walk-away IS the leverage.
The mindset. Splitting the difference is what amateurs do because it ends the discomfort. Pros stay in the discomfort because that's where the money lives.