Negotiation is the process of resolving conflict through discussion, and a hostage incident is one in which an individual uses force or the threat of force to take people captive against their will and hold them in order to bargain for the fulfillment of certain demands. Law enforcement engages in hostage negotiation in an attempt to influence and control the hostage taker’s behavior. The value of such negotiations in saving lives has been demonstrated repeatedly. In fact, the data show that in high-risk crisis situations (whether hostages are present or not), negotiators are successful more than 90% of the time, and if negotiators are used, there are no injuries or fatalities in almost all of these incidents.
The first law enforcement hostage negotiation team in the United States was formed by Harvey Schlossberg and Frank Boltz in the early 1970s at the New York City Police Department. The basic principles they stressed then are still relevant and used today by negotiators: (a) containment and negotiating with the hostage taker, (b) understanding the motivation and personality of the hostage taker, and (c) slowing down and using time to reduce emotions and allow for a negotiated settlement.
In only about 4% of hostage incidences in the United States do hostage negotiators respond. The vast majority of incidents that negotiators deal with are non-hostage events, such as barricaded subjects (with or without victims, e.g., someone known to the subject) and high-risk suicide. Other situations include domestic violence incidents, prison or jail riots, high-risk or mental health warrants, and debriefing following crisis events. In these situations, the use of negotiators is crucial, as the emotions of the subject can be made worse by a confrontational law enforcement response.
This article begins with a discussion of hostage versus crisis negotiation. It then reviews the stages of a hostage or crisis incident. The entry concludes with a look at the skills negotiators use to listen to subjects and respond to their demands.
Hostage Versus Crisis Negotiation
In all incidents, including true hostage-taking incidents, law enforcement negotiators use their negotiation and intervention skills to de-escalate and defuse the crisis experienced by the subject. Even in a true hostage situation, the subject is in crisis, so crisis intervention skills can be used. For this reason, many negotiating teams now consider themselves crisis negotiating teams rather than hostage negotiating teams. For example, a bank robber has a plan to enter and rob a bank. During the robbery, a silent alarm is sounded and the police arrive. Because the plan went awry, the robber is in crisis.
Regardless of the type of situation, the subject is in crisis. Negotiators are trained to use basic crisis intervention strategies to reestablish the subject’s equilibrium and resolve the subject’s immediate problem. Negotiators provide a short-term, time-limited intervention that reduces the subject’s emotions and increases the subject’s rationality. Even in the latter stages of a crisis incident, crisis intervention skills are still critical and necessary to help the subject keep his or her emotions under control.
Stages of an Incident
A hostage or barricade incident is a process with identifiable and predictable stages. The Precrisis Stage occurs prior to the incident when the subject’s emotions are under control. For the subject, a plan is developed, and he or she prepares to implement the plan. The Crisis Stage is when the plan goes awry, something occurs to the subject to cause emotions to rise out of control (e.g., he or she may be fired, a relationship ends, police arrive to the bank robbery). Negotiators use their crisis intervention skills to help the subject regain control of his or her emotions. This is the most dangerous stage of the incident for all concerned. The Accommodation/Negotiation Stage is when the subject’s emotions are once again under control and the subject is thinking rationally. The Resolution/Surrender Stage is when the subject surrenders. Because the subject is moving into the unknown, this stage is the second most dangerous of an incident.
Active Listening Skills
Perhaps one of the most important, if not the most important, skill a negotiator can possess is that of communication. Many people assume that communication means the ability to talk to someone. While that is important, to the negotiator, the critical aspect of communication is the ability to actively listen. The reduction of emotions requires that the subject be allowed to vent and validate his or her emotions. For this to occur, the negotiator uses active listening skills and allows the subject to talk, demonstrating to the subject that he or she is being heard and taken seriously. The active listening skills critical to negotiations include (a) effective pauses, (b) open-ended questions, (c) paraphrasing, (d) emotional labeling, (e) minimal encouragers, (f) mirroring meaning, and (g) I-messages. For example, instead of asking the subject, “Have you and your spouse been fighting,” the negotiator might use an open-ended question such as, “Can you explain what happened between you and your spouse this morning?”. After the answer, the negotiator might then say, “It sounds like as your argument escalated, you became frustrated more than angry” (emotional labeling).
Demand Issues
Ultimately, subjects want something from law enforcement. To successfully resolve a hostage or crisis incident, negotiators must deal with these demand issues. Almost anything the subject asks for—with the exception of weapons, release of prisoners, trading of hostages, and drugs—is negotiable. Although negotiators are open to negotiating the subject’s demands, that does not mean the subject will get what he or she asks for. The role of the negotiator is to listen to the subject, reduce the subject’s emotions, and help the subject engage in problem-solving. The negotiator may work on reducing demands made; however, making decisions with regard to the demand issues is typically the responsibility of the incident commander rather than the negotiator. With the passage of time, grandiose demands, such as asking for US$1 million and a plane to a foreign country, often become more reasonable demands (e.g., food, water, cigarettes).
References:
- McMains, M. J., & Mullins, W. C. (2014). Crisis negotiations: Managing critical incidents and hostage situations in law enforcement and corrections (5th ed.). New York, NY: Elsevier.
- Noesner, G. (2011). Stalling for time: My life as an FBI hostage negotiator. New York, NY: Random House.
- Strentz, T. (2013). Psychological aspects of crisis negotiations (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.