What does a hostage negotiator know that mediators should think about?
It turns out there's a lot.
I came across an infographic on LinkedIn that caught my attention.
I was already familiar with Chris Voss, the former FBI lead hostage negotiator, and his teachings about negotiations.
On LinkedIn, someone broke down 7 negotiation tactics used by FBI hostage negotiators as taught by Voss. It reads like a checklist of everything we already do in the mediation room; although, I don't think mediators have thought about these tactics in the same way.
You can read the post at this link https://www.linkedin.com/posts/natanmohart_most-people-think-negotiation-is-about-talking-activity-7461011063719751680-sHQ0?utm_source=social_share_send&utm_medium=member_desktop_web&rcm=ACoAAAA2TVwBQO0P0nLZtoDPkKXWosw6jh1YVA4
The one tactic that primarily hit home: the "That's Right" Trigger. When we summarize the other party's position so accurately, so completely, that they can only say "that's right." We know that moment. That's not just validation — that's the sound of someone finally feeling heard. And when people feel heard, they start engaging.
I'm also a fan of replacing "Why" with "How" and "What." Why always sounds like an accusation. How and What sound like curiosity.
The LinkedIn post discusses a framework built by Voss called "Tactical Empathy", which he defines as deliberately understanding your counterpart's feelings and what's behind them, then voicing that recognition out loud.
That's strategic.
His tool for doing it? Labeling -- using phrases like "It seems like…" or "It sounds like…" to acknowledge and validate what the other person is feeling. Not telling them what to feel. Just observing, without judgment, so they can set the burden down and start talking.
And I'm curious what you think. Is naming emotions disarming, or does it land as a technique?












