Climbing and Calming the Negotiation Ladder

Olivia Carter

Hey everyone, welcome back. I’m Olivia Carter and as usual, I’m joined by Mark Putnam—mark, I hope you’ve got plenty of coffee today because we’re climbing the escalation ladder. Negotiation, not a real ladder.

Mark Putnam

Afternoon, Olivia. And yes, I’m ready, though to be honest, the real challenge isn’t the ladder itself—it’s noticing when you’re already on it. In any university or tech negotiation, most folks don’t realize things are escalating until reciprocity is already slipping. That’s the big red flag: the moment when the talk stops feeling like a partnership and shifts to jockeying for position.

Olivia Carter

Exactly. It’s always sneaky. You know, the first time I saw this up close was actually when I was still at TechCrunch, sweating through a software partnership deal. Everything seemed fine—two teams trading info, nudging deadlines, classic back-and-forth. Then one day I get this email, totally out of the blue, reopening a decision we’d already settled. The tone hadn’t turned nasty, but suddenly it was like, wait, did we miss something? Is this personal now?

Mark Putnam

That’s so familiar. The tone doesn’t have to be hostile—just that low-grade shift from “solving a shared problem” to “I need to protect myself.” I see it start with a tiny wording change or a spreadsheet clarification. Suddenly, assertive personalities treat it like a challenge; accommodators fear a relationship breakdown, and analysts get obsessed with what went wrong. Recognizing that early climb is everything.

Olivia Carter

Yeah—I probably overanalyzed every sentence in that email! It’s interesting, as you said, how quickly those style-driven instincts kick in. At the time, one of my colleagues wanted to fire off a hard reply, another started apologizing for things we didn’t even do, and someone else, uh, just got lost double-checking all our document history. I didn’t have the language for it back then, but looking back, that was textbook escalation.

Mark Putnam

And when you spot it, the real work begins. If you address it early, you have a shot at keeping both the negotiation and the relationship grounded. Let’s jump into what these reactions mean in practice—and why they’re actually pretty predictable, if you know how to look for them.

Mark Putnam

So, the classic framework—sometimes we lean a lot on Chris Voss here—divides negotiation styles into three buckets: Assertive, Accommodator, Analyst. These show up everywhere: in the boardroom, in procurement, even picking a restaurant.

Olivia Carter

Don’t remind me—I’m always the one saying, “Let’s just get pizza” to avoid a fight. But really, each style’s default reaction when the pressure ramps up is what matters. Assertives? They want momentum. If something feels off, they double down, sometimes escalate and treat it almost like a contest. Accommodators are more likely to immediately look for ways to calm things; they might even give something away too soon, just to fix that awkward vibe. And then you’ve got Analysts, who hit the brakes and go data-diving while everyone else is itching to move.

Mark Putnam

Right, and the risks map accordingly. Assertives will over-escalate and get into “win or lose” mode—a contest mindset, which can fracture things quickly. Accommodators risk conceding before the real issues are out in the open, and that, ironically, breeds resentment later. Analysts—well, they sorta check out if things get illogical or emotional. Their withdrawal stalls negotiations, sometimes permanently.

Olivia Carter

Yeah, and you know, Mark, I’d love to hear your perspective here. I know you’ve seen higher ed negotiations go sideways because of this mix. How does it play out with, like, IT projects and big vendor deals on campus?

Mark Putnam

Let’s take a real example. We were working on a major SaaS transition. The vendor’s rep was pure Assertive—he’d reopen issues, try to pressure with tight deadlines. My deputy CIO, total Analyst, would get stuck reviewing clauses for days. Meanwhile, our business officer—definitely an Accommodator—started promising adjustments without any real authority. The room split three ways. Everyone was frustrated for a different reason, and the negotiation nearly blew up. The only way out was pausing, naming what was happening, and realigning everyone to process and goals, not just feelings. Most teams don’t do that pause soon enough.

Olivia Carter

It’s wild how universal those patterns are, from startups to universities. Everyone thinks the other side is being stubborn, but really, it’s just instinct. Understanding those reactions—that’s how you stay off that escalation ladder, or at least don’t climb it blindfolded.

Olivia Carter

Okay, so let’s walk through those first rungs in practice. We start with the crazy anchor—someone throws out a number or demand so extreme, it’s meant to shake you. In the startup world, that’s, like, table stakes. I’ve seen founders start way above what’s reasonable just to reset expectations, then dial it back—but only if the other side pushes back, right?

Mark Putnam

Exactly. For Assertives, that anchor reads as a direct challenge—they want to counter-anchor, and things can get heated fast. Accommodators get uneasy and concede early to just end the discomfort, and Analysts sort of stall out wanting more data. In higher ed, you might see a vendor anchor with a threatening deadline or a non-negotiable price. Most dangerous if no one names the tactic.

Olivia Carter

I always wonder—do universities have the discipline to use these tactics the way a startup would? Anchoring feels almost, I don’t know, antagonistic in an academic setting.

Mark Putnam

There’s truth there. Universities typically prefer collaboration, but discipline is just as necessary. The key is not to overreact—to test the anchor, ask for the rationale, and not escalate impulsively. Same goes for the next rung: appeals to outside authority. You hear, “Well, the CFO says no,” but the CFO’s never actually in the room. Voss calls it the invisible ‘No’—you can’t negotiate with someone not present.

Olivia Carter

Oh, that’s a classic. In tech, it’s “I need to run it by legal” or “the board.” Suddenly you’re up against ghosts. How each style responds is so telling. Assertives might bulldoze, Accommodators take it at face value, Analysts go hunting for documentation. But the resulting chaos—it feels designed to stall or frustrate.

Mark Putnam

And then, if that doesn’t settle things, out comes direct authority: “We’re doing it this way, period.” That’s usually where the gloves come off. Assertives explode, Accommodators reluctantly cave but resent it, and Analysts see no logic so they just shut down. Staying disciplined here—like using a conditional yes, or simply mirroring their command back as a question—often stops the climb. If you skip that, you risk making the escalation permanent.

Mark Putnam

Now, at rung four, the whole thing changes: that’s when people start running around you, taking the issue to presidents, boards, or some other authority above your head. This is less negotiation, more politics. End runs are almost always a point of no return—the relationship gets fundamentally changed, and the process gets hijacked.

Olivia Carter

It’s so tempting to just try the shortcut sometimes, but it rarely works out. The best negotiators I know in tech are the ones who, honestly, kill escalation before it gets here by prepping leadership ahead of time. So when someone tries to go over their head, leadership already knows the ask and the boundaries. It collapses the shortcut because, well, there’s nowhere to go but back to the table.

Mark Putnam

Faculty governance is notorious for this in universities. I once had a situation where a routine technology adoption was negotiated at the department level, then, out of nowhere, someone bypassed protocol and went straight to the provost. Suddenly no one was negotiating anymore—it was political theater, factions lining up. The fallout lasted for months, trust eroded, and even after it technically “resolved,” nobody felt good about the process. You can’t always undo that damage, which is why the real fix is preventative. Get everyone on the same page at the start—structure the conversations so leadership is already aligned, and the process runs by design, not by ambush.

Olivia Carter

Reminds me of what we said a few episodes back about how managing surprise and doing the “two readings” keeps people looped in—and why bypasses feel like, I don’t know, a betrayal. Once that’s in motion, you’re not solving problems anymore, you’re just protecting your reputation or your job. It’s exhausting.

Olivia Carter

So the last rung—attacks and discrediting—that’s where it gets ugly. Someone moves away from the issue entirely and takes aim at your integrity or reputation, starts complaining about you personally to others. That’s…well, for me at least, that’s always the hardest to navigate without either shutting down or wanting to just fight back.

Mark Putnam

For most, that’s when discipline slips. Assertives want to fight, Accommodators question themselves and give in just to end the conflict, Analysts freeze because there’s no logic left to respond to. It’s important to keep composure—silence and labeling are powerful here. “It sounds like you’re frustrated.” And then you wait. Often that pause will break the attack’s momentum, give everyone a chance to reset. Also—bring allies in early, document everything. That’s your reputational buffer when things escalate up the ladder.

Olivia Carter

I think I learned the hard way that you can’t control others’ behavior, but you can absolutely control how and when you respond. I always try to pause, label what’s happening, and then loop in colleagues I trust if things feel like they’re turning personal. It’s not weakness—it’s a way to regain a bit of agency and protect the work, not just your ego.

Mark Putnam

And integrity is everything. The thing about negotiation is, as we’ve been saying all along, it isn’t just about tactics—it’s self-awareness. The ladder is always there, but you decide whether to climb or steady the rung. Silence, documentation, discipline. That’s how you ground things, even when others try to pull you up the ladder for the wrong reasons.

Olivia Carter

Well, Mark, that’s a wrap for today’s trek up—and hopefully back down—the escalation ladder. I hope everyone listening walks away with a better sense of their own negotiation style, and how to keep things steady when the pressure rises. We’ll be back soon, probably with something a little less adrenalizing? What do you think, Mark?

Mark Putnam

I think next time we could all use a bit more calm in the boardroom—and a little less ladder climbing. Thanks, Olivia, and thanks everyone for tuning in. See you next time.

Olivia Carter

Take care y’all.