This advice is also part of the book "Never split the difference" by Christopher Voss, a highly recommended book for anyone looking to improve their negotiation skills.
It's not that these numbers are magical in any way, it's just that for me it's convenient to have a rule ready so I don't have to expend mental energy on what numbers to say, and I can instead use that energy on coming up with how to present them.
Knowing the steps I'll take to the final offer ahead of time also makes me slightly more comfortable entering such a low bid to start out with.
If you ignore the stuff your linked comments complain about, which is largely him having an obnoxious writing style and literal too-cool-for-(Harvard)-school attitude (them nerds don't know nothin'!), I found tons of the actual content immediately applicable with lots of return.
The thing I absolutely loved about the book was shifting your mindset away from negotiations being these big scary stressful standoffs with winners and losers, and towards them being lighthearted, possibly even fun(!) shared problem solving sessions. That mental shift, and having a box of tools to use, makes navigating tricky situations so much easier.
It also make me look forward to previously stressful situations. For instance, I recently bought a new car, which is a process I usually loathe. However, using all the tricks from the book, I was able to negotiate down a crazy amount off our car with the main approach being the "how can I do X?" from the book. There was some back and forth, some huffing and puffing about how it couldn't be done ("we're already taking a loss on this!"), but eventually, after numerous showy checks with the management, we agreed on a price. I legit had a blast the whole time cause the mental state the entire time was "can we solve this problem together?"
I read "How to Measure Anything in Cybersecurity Risk" but the relevant concepts are from his original book:
- every measurement is an approximation
- you can determine a more accurate valuation (or probability) by thinking in terms of bets
The book isn't primarily about negotiating, but it is about estimating based on incomplete information, which applies to all negotiations. Avoiding a round number doesn't need to be arbitrary. By calibrating your estimation process you can come up with a more precise number, which can also boost your confidence.
The result is both having a more specific valuation in mind, and being more comfortable with the outcome regardless of whether the deal worked for fell apart.
1: https://www.howtomeasureanything.com/books-by-douglas-hubbar...
why would you come up with some to-the-$1,000 asking price in a salary negotiation rather than just asking for 30% more than you'd be okay with?
i know he has another version where at some point in the negotiation (rather than the beginning), you whip out some very precise number, but that would immediately strike me as a psychological play rather than the honesty/thoughtfulness it's designed to convey.
in a different situation it's certainly more effective, like when requesting a budget/expense for a specific project, since it signals you've done the math and not just throwing inflated approximations.
I have always used the "imprecise offer" somewhere in the middle, and it usually worked out great.
This is like saying "I avoid companies run by humans".
The book also mentions anchoring should usually be avoided in negotiations and instead it recommends you focus on the non monetary value points each party can exchange.
There is actually a section on negotiating salary and IIRC it recommends you provide a range where the bottom of the range is where you are hoping to land.
So you are correct - I would never say in a salary negotiation that I need an exact dollar amount as it might make me love petty unless I prefaced it with 'I have a family to feed and a roof to put over our heads'.