What's the Worst That Could Happen?
Negotiation Lessons from the Stoics and WATNA
“Set aside a certain number of days, during which you shall be content with the scantiest and cheapest fare, with coarse and rough dress, saying to yourself the while: “Is this the condition that I feared?”
— Seneca
Say WATNA?
In the boardroom or courtroom, or at the kitchen table, negotiation often hinges not on what we want, but on what we fear.
What if the deal falls apart? What if the other party walks away? What if I end up worse off than when I started?
In modern negotiation theory, there’s a catchy term for this: the worst alternative to a negotiated agreement (WATNA). It’s a structured way to ask, “If this negotiation fails, what’s the worst realistic outcome?”
But the Stoics actually got there first.
They called it premeditatio malorum, or the premeditation of evils. Before entering into a challenge, a Stoic would pause and imagine what might go wrong. Not to catastrophize, but to prepare. Not to panic, but to disarm fear.
“Rehearse them in your mind: exile, torture, war, shipwreck. All the terms of our human condition should be before our eyes.”
— Seneca
WATNA as Modern Premeditation
Here’s the thing, negotiators. When you identify your WATNA, you're doing exactly what the Stoics advised:
You’re exposing hidden fears to daylight.
You’re acknowledging that you can’t control every outcome.
And, most importantly, you’re deciding how you’ll respond if things don’t go your way.
This is emotional discipline in action. It’s not defeatist. It’s clarity.
You’ll see this approach in other contexts, too.
Psychologists might call it negative visualization. Management teams in business settings? They run premortems at the beginning of projects, challenging themselves to look backwards from a hypothetical failure and describe what went wrong. Investor, podcaster, and author Tim Ferriss has popularly described his “fear-setting” exercise, where in a given situation he defines his nightmare scenario, considers the steps he’d take to recover, and weighs the likelihood of more probable positive outcomes in making decisions.
Why It Works
The Stoics believed that fear thrives in ambiguity. By visualizing the worst, you shrink it to size. In negotiation, WATNA offers that same power:
It helps you avoid rash concessions made out of panic.
It grounds your choices in facts, not feelings.
It reminds you that failure, like all things, has its bounds. It’s something to endure, not something to fear endlessly. Failure isn’t a free fall, but a fall with a floor.
A Stoic Exercise for Negotiators
So before your next negotiation:
Define your WATNA. Note the worst likely outcome if you can’t agree. Not necessarily the absolute worst, but the plausible worst.
Ask: Can I endure this? Most of the time, the answer is yes.
Then return to the table, calm and clear-headed. You’ve already met the worst in your mind. What’s left is to do your best.
Work to get your most favorable option on the table. If you’ve done your homework, you know your best alternative to the offered deal, or BATNA (ideally, also that of your counterpart). And now you’ve considered your worst, too.
Your decision might be difficult, but your choices should be clearer.
WATNA is not just a tactic. It’s a practice in self-mastery.
And the Stoics would approve.
Good post!