door-in-the-facelisted

# Door-in-the-Face Technique ## Overview Ask for something large (expect refusal), then retreat to the smaller request you actually wanted. The empirically documented result: compliance with the smaller ask is 2-3x higher than asking for it directly (Cialdini et al., 1975). The mechanism is *reciprocal concession* — the target perceives your retreat as a concession and feels social pressure to match it. Three operations: **recognize** DITF when used on you; **design** it ethically as a proposer; **distinguish** it from pure anchoring (two requests with refusal vs. a single number). Composes with [`reciprocity`](../reciprocity/SKILL.md), [`anchoring`](../anchoring/SKILL.md), [`signaling-games`](../signaling-games/SKILL.md), [`batna-zopa`](../batna-zopa/SKILL.md). ## When to Use - Designing a negotiation opening where you want to land at a specific price/term - Designing a fundraising ask where the target gift is moderate but commitment to the cause is high - Designing a sales process where you want customers in a specific tier - **Recognizing** that you are being run with DITF by an opposing party - Someone says: "door-in-the-face," "reciprocal concession," "anchor high then retreat," "they conceded so I should too" **Not when:** the larger request is so absurd the target reads the opening as bad faith (the technique collapses); the target has no reciprocity norm operating; you are negotiating with a counterparty who will read your retreat as DITF. ## Coaching Novices (