In negotiation, the first number matters far more than most people realize.

That number—whether it’s a demand, an offer, or even a casual comment—becomes an anchor, silently shaping expectations and influencing every move that follows.

Even when everyone knows the number is unrealistic.

Why Anchors Work (Even When They Shouldn’t)

Anchoring is our tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information we receive. Once a number enters the conversation, all subsequent evaluations are unconsciously measured against it.

Research shows this effect is remarkably strong. Even random, irrelevant numbers can influence judgment. In negotiation, strategically chosen anchors are anything but random.

A Costly Example

In a personal injury case, plaintiff’s counsel opened with a $5 million demand. Defense counsel knew it was wildly inflated—their internal valuation was $400,000 to $600,000.

But throughout the day, discussions kept circling back to that $5 million figure.

“They’re down to $3.5 million,” defense counsel noted at one point. “That’s a 30% reduction.”

“From a made-up number,” I replied. “Your evaluation hasn’t changed, has it?”

It hadn’t. But the anchor had done its damage. The case ultimately settled for $850,000—well above where the defense expected to land—because $850,000 felt “reasonable” when compared to $5 million.

Counterstrategies for Anchoring

Set your own anchor first when possible.
If you can make the first move, do so with a number that’s aggressive but defensible. Logic and evidence make anchors stick.

Counter-anchor immediately.
Don’t just dismiss extreme demands. Respond with a competing reference point. Give the other side a new number to think about.

Refuse their frame.
Avoid negotiating from their anchor. Instead of saying, “$4.5 million is too high,” reset the discussion: “Let’s talk about what the evidence actually supports.”

Use objective criteria.
Comparable verdicts, documented damages, market data—objective benchmarks weaken subjective anchors.

Check your own thinking.
When you hear the first number, pause and ask: “Am I evaluating this on its merits, or just in comparison to where they started?”

The Mediator’s Role—and the Bigger Lesson

Anchors are powerful, but they aren’t permanent. A skilled mediator can help parties step back from positional numbers and refocus on interests, risk, and reality.

Which leads to the broader lesson underlying all three biases.

The Meta-Strategy: Awareness and Humility

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: knowing about cognitive biases doesn’t make you immune to them. I see these patterns in myself—even after decades of doing this work.

The most effective negotiators build safeguards into their process:

• Assume you’re biased. Don’t ask if bias is present—ask how it’s affecting judgment.
• Institutionalize skepticism. Make challenging assumptions routine.
• Value dissent. The colleague pointing out weaknesses is doing you a favor.
• Use mediation strategically. A good mediator isn’t just a messenger—they’re a debiasing agent.

The mediations that succeed aren’t always the ones with the best facts or strongest legal arguments. Often, they’re the ones where the parties recognize that their own brains may be working against them—and take deliberate steps to counteract that.

Randy Leff is a mediator and settlement counsel specializing in Trust and Estates disputes. For more insights on negotiation strategy, visit LeffMediation.com.