The subtle influence of no-oriented questions

Do you know the feeling when someone is not-so-subtly driving you towards a "yes"? Then you also know how it feels like you are being lead into a trap, like you are about to accidentally commit to something. When my kids ask me for something, my mind almost immediately jumps to "no" until I am actually able to start processing the substance of what was just asked. "Yes" feels like loss of control, "no" feels like protection.

There's a lot of problems with "yes". I guess this is rooted in the notion that you so badly want your counterpart to get to "yes" and agree with you. And that it is perceived as conventional wisdom that building "yes momentum" with small asks will get you a "yes" to the eventual big ask. We all get giddy when we hear the magic word, and we forget the defensiveness we feel ourselves when we push people to say it. When we are too pushy you may get what Chris Voss refers to as a "counterfeit yes", which is basically a "yes" someone says to get you to leave them alone, with no intention of actually delivering on the agreed thing. But you got your "yes", so it feels good and your immediate need is satisfied.

Reframing your questions to elicit a "no"

“No” allows individuals to feel in control of the situation. "No" feels likes you aren't commiting to anything. "No" is a safe space with less anxiety. With a "no", your counterpart is more likely to engage. This feels counter-intuitive, because "no" is often seen as failure, as the end of the conversation. Taking what I wrote above and reframing a "no" from a moment of rejection into a moment of protection grants an interesting perspective: Strategically rephrasing our questions to gun for a "no" instead of a "yes" keeps the conversation moving. The "no" creates room for dialogue instead of backing someone into a corner.

Lets go through two examples.

Instead of asking, "Do you agree with this proposal?"- which pressures your counterpart into saying "yes" or appearing uncooperative - you could ask, "Is this proposal completely off the table for you?" It feels much safer for the person to say "no" because it doesn’t lock them into anything. And once they say "no," they’re more likely to explain why it isn’t off the table and what changes would make it more acceptable.

Instead of "Can we schedule a meeting for next week?" you ask, "Would it be ridiculous to meet next week?" The "no" response - "No, it wouldn’t be ridiculous"- moves the conversation forward, without the other side feeling guilted into a "yes."

This isn't a magic trick. If we go a level deeper this is what is important: We shouldn't push for agreement, we should push for understanding and dialogue. A powerful word to foster this is "no". "No" isn't your enemy.