Hostage negotiations

I recently started paying more attention to hostage negotiation after watching the new TV show Flashpoint.

Hostage negotiation is a difficult and complex task, and systems exist to aide the negotiator in everything from preventing escalation of the situation to creating rapport, all in the goal of closing, bringing the incident to a peaceful ending.

Reading about the subject, I found these articles most interesting, and more importantly, concise:

1. HowStuffWork entry on hostage negotiation
A good introduction to the subject and the system, with historical background and a bit on the Stockholm syndrome.

From the article above:

Stockholm Syndrome
Spending hours, days and months together doesn't only foster feelings on the part of the hostage-taker toward the hostages. The hostages often develop sympathy for their captors, as well. This is known as Stockholm Syndrome, named after a Swedish bank heist gone wrong that resulted in a six-day stand-off. The hostages ended up assisting the robber, acting as lookouts and giving him advice, while gradually coming to view the police outside as their common enemy. One of the female hostages even married him while he was still in prison.

There are complicated psychological reasons for Stockholm Syndrome. It is in part a defense mechanism that allows people to cope with an otherwise unbearable situation. It also has something to do with power -- the hostage-taker has the power to kill the hostages, and when he doesn't, the hostages' relief can turn into gratitude, which eventually develops into sympathy. Also, fear of the police rushing into the situation and killing the hostages accidentally in a shootout is very powerful and helps turn the hostages against the authorities.

2. From The Negotiator Magazine: Negotiation Lessons Learned by an FBI Hostage Negotiator
On hostage negotiations from the perspective of an FBI expert, comparing the task to his previous occupation, sales.

Some key quotes:

We, negotiators and sales people, know that our subjects and clients sometimes behave in seemingly irrational ways. We know how difficult it is to be truly heard or understood. Not matter how difficult the client or subject, we must remember that this negotiation is not about you, the negotiator or salesperson. It is about the subject or client and his or her needs. This point is may be hard to keep in mind especially when the client is nasty, insulting or worse.

Likewise, there is more to sales than just the marketing department and sales personnel. Everyone in the organization must be saying the same thing; from the CEO to even cleaning personnel. Cleaning personnel talking between themselves on an elevator in the presence of a potential client can derail a deal as quickly as a poor salesperson. A failure to recognize this point can be and has been costly in terms of lives and money.

Albert Einstein once said, “Make everything as simple as possible but not simpler.” There are many smart people in the FBI and in your corporation who will come up with complex answers to problems. The secret is in looking for simple answers from smart people! Those are the answers in which I have the most confidence. During an aircraft hijacking, FBI agents at the scene were concerned about a long coat the hijacker was wearing. It was speculated that the hijacker might have a bomb under the coat. Later, when asked why that particular coat was worn to the airport she said, “It was cold and it is the only coat I own.”

“Pushing the deal” for law enforcement negotiators is analogous to pushing for a close on a sale before the client is ready to close. Negotiators offer the “deal” at the outset but if the deal is declined, negotiators back off and begin the negotiation process. “Pushing the deal” too hard early-on builds distrust and people “dig in” against you.

Negotiators in the United States are taught that early on and, if appropriate, not to forget to ask the subject to come out. There have been instances in the United States when after negotiating for ten hours the subject finally surrendered. When asked why he did not come out sooner, the subject replied, “Nobody asked.”

Negotiators should listen for unspoken needs. One indicator that there are expressive needs not being met is when all of the instrumental needs have been met and a client still will not close a deal.

Expressive needs can be very personal. The subject's shift from instrumental needs to expressive needs may indicate the development of trust and rapport and, therefore, progress in the negotiation.

In conclusion, I believe that there are many more parallels between what law enforcement negotiators and business people do; far more than can be covered in a short article. The most significant parallel is that law enforcement negotiators and salespeople are both selling hope. The negotiator and salesperson are both selling the hope that the subject's or client's future will be better. In this writer's view, there is no more worthwhile product.

Pinky.

When first becoming aware of body language

Reading body language is natural, "we all do it". As babies we liked smiling faces better and as adults we read an "aura" or "state of mind" from people we interact with. We are good at it.

In extreme opposite is interpreting body language and being aware of doing so. Most people are not good at it, in fact, they are very poor in this regard.

I used to be of the second type. Over time I collected references to body language, from "the smile didn't reach his eyes" in books I read, wondering what it meant, to hearing about "crossed arms means the person is closed to you". These references didn't mean much until at some point I accumulated so many it reached critical mass.

Suddenly I was aware of body language, and boy was I confused. I kept being self-conscious, as I didn't know what was right. Up to that point some invisible layer worked its black box magic in front of my cognitive system. I reacted to people and what I felt from them, but I didn't know much more.

This previous behaviour caused me to be polarizing. I would notice a person being cold or impatient and would read it as they not liking me or being snobs. I'd return the favour even if they were just busy or tired at the time. On the other extreme end I'd not be able to understand a certain someone doesn't like me if I was previously convinced they are my friends. People who were cool to me, I was cool to. As a personal disclaimer, this statement is over-simplifying and explained in extremes. I may be an extreme person, but I am a person.

Suddenly my "system", not polarizing for several years now, was gone. Becoming aware of body language made me continually self-conscious. Here is an example story.

I was in an informal meeting with a high level non-politician foreign government official when I caught myself leg over leg (in the so called "number 4" position), hands interlaced behind my head. I stopped dead--is this what I am supposed to project? What am I projecting anyway?

I immediately dropped to a reset position. Legs on the floor, hands on legs. But wait.... how am I supposed to sit down? Non of it made sense, I had zero knowledge to back my new-found awareness.

Then, of course... what of the person opposite me? I didn't even consider his body language.

I landed in the States and went to a Barnes & Noble to look for a body language book. I got to the self-help section and tried to find any book not promising endless sex or immediate success in business. Eventually I came across my first body language book, The Definitive Book of Body Language by Barbara and Allan Pease.

The book helped me in three significant fashions.

In its view, body language is indeed a language and requires content as well as context. For a sentence to make sense, one word such as "sofa" wouldn't help. "Sofa" and "living room", would help. Adding the word "new" would add context for us to make sense of the sentence. Like they teach in math lessons in school, two to three points for drawing a line.

In "professional" language these combinations of body language signals are called "clusters". A person just crossing their hands may mean nothing, or everything. Clusters of signals tell us what it is all about. Another consideration is watching for such signals and clusters chronologically, over time.

One signal or gesture could mean a person is cold or any other mundane reason. Freud was notorious for smoking Cigars. Cigars being clear Phallic (or sexual) symbols, his students mentioned it to him. His reply was "sometimes a Cigar is just a Cigar," hence the known quotation.

The second significant point that I learned from the book was how body language is a closed feedback loop of emotions. This is best demonstrated with smiles. If you feel good you often smile. When you smile you will feel good.

In this fashion I was able to literally catch myself with, say, crossed hands. Then ask: Am I somehow defensive or uncomfortable? The growth in personal awareness and being in touch with one's feelings is impressive.

The third point of significance hit me when I travelled. I hit up a conversation with an older business man in the airport lounge. He told me how he is not very aware of the body language issue, but he did notice how body language can be useful in negotiations.

If he wants to convey dismay, instead of verbalizing it and moving the negotiation to it, he simply crosses his hands, maybe leans back. The other side gets the idea.

An unrelated point I learned from the book changed my life, it taught me how to identify fake smiles. While I am not yet very good at it, it means I no longer just fall stupidly for any girl who smiles my way.

The book itself was easily readable, and interesting. It was disturbing how the authors just name-dropped researchers with no standard of academic quotation, continually. The contribution the book gave me was not in being able to read body language, as I wasn't.

The contribution was that while reading about it, I thought about it in a framed fashion and the automagical awareness module to read and respond to body language unconsciously, came back. I then started the long journey to learn and understand my surrounding and non-verbal communication, on which I will write another time.

Two weeks ago I spoke with an old friend and he disagreed with my being the second type of person, the unaware one. He reminded me of how in our phone conversations I cued on every pause and asked him about it. A girlfriend of mine also didn't agree. She suggested I was always aware, just didn't realize what it means.

Awareness followed by unsettled disquiet followed by understanding.

Pinky.