The Ackerman Method, Made Practical

Sequenced bidding, calibrated concessions, and the psychology of closing

The Ackerman Model: Chris Voss’s 65-85-95-100 Method

The Ackerman model, taught by Chris Voss in Never Split the Difference, is a four-bid negotiation sequence: after setting your target, you offer 65% of it, then 85%, then 95%, then your true 100% target — each increase smaller than the last. The shrinking increments signal you are nearing your real limit even as you appear to keep conceding, so your counterpart feels they have won a hard bargain while you land at the number you planned all along.

Most negotiators concede in equal steps — which signals that more is available. The Ackerman method, drawn from FBI hostage negotiation and commercial deal-making, uses decreasing concession size and deliberate non-round numbers to signal genuine limits. The counterpart feels they have extracted maximum concessions — even when you have stayed close to your target. These practices break down how and why the method works.

Practices

Practice this with IX Coach

Related concepts

Frequently asked questions

The Ackerman Model: Chris Voss’s 65-85-95-100 Method

Set your target before you open: how do you never anchor to their first offer?

First numbers anchor subsequent judgments — even arbitrary ones. Without a pre-committed target, your counterpart’s opening offer becomes the reference point your brain adjusts from, systematically pulling you toward their desired outcome. Establishing your target before any numbers are on the table immunizes you against their anchor.

Use the Ackerman bid sequence: how do you 65%–85%–95%–100% of target?

The sequence of decreasing concession sizes (starting at 65% of your target, moving to 85%, 95%, 100%) communicates information nonverbally: the reducing step size signals that each concession costs more, implying you are near your floor. The counterpart experiences the negotiation as extracting hard concessions even when you end at your planned target. Equal-step concessions signal unlimited room; decreasing steps signal a real limit.

How do you use precise, non-round numbers in final offers?

Round numbers (50,000, 100,000) read as placeholders — starting points waiting to be negotiated. Precise non-round numbers ($47,800; $63,250) signal that you have done specific calculation — that the number comes from a real constraint or analysis. This increases the perceived legitimacy of the number and reduces the expectation of further movement.

How do you accompany your final offer with a small non-monetary concession?

A final offer accompanied by a small non-monetary addition (a service, a timeline accommodation, a minor term) signals sincerity — you are giving something additional, which signals that you cannot give more on the main number. It also gives the counterpart a face-saving element: they can point to having extracted something beyond the number, even if the number is what you planned all along.

What is Maintain empathy and calibrated questions throughout the Ackerman process?

A mechanical bid sequence without relational warmth reads as a script, which triggers the counterpart’s suspicion and resistance. Ackerman is a framework for the substantive offers; tactical empathy and calibrated questions ("How am I supposed to do that?" / "What makes that work for you?") are the relational container that makes each bid land as a genuine human conversation rather than a technique.

Chris Voss 65-85-95-100 Ackerman model: how do you rehearse the official sequence?

High-stakes negotiation produces cognitive and emotional load that degrades in-the-moment decision-making. The Ackerman model as Voss publishes it in Never Split the Difference is a fixed four-bid ladder: set your target, open at 65% of it, then 85%, then 95%, then 100%. The increments shrink by design — 20 points, then 10, then 5 — so each concession reads as smaller than the last and signals you are approaching a real limit. Two details make the sequence work and are the ones people drop: use precise non-round numbers (37,893 rather than 38,000), because a specific figure implies a calculation behind it rather than a position to be haggled; and on the final 100% bid, add a non-monetary item you know the counterpart cannot easily grant, which makes the number itself feel like the end of the road. Rehearsing the numbers, the counteroffer responses, and the calibrated questions moves them into procedural memory, freeing working memory for reading the counterpart and adapting. The preparation is the source of the poise that experienced negotiators display.