The difference between a warning and a threat (William Ury)

What’s the difference between a warning and a threat?

(Note: Ury uses the term BATNA to refer to your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. That is, your fallback option if the interaction/negotiation/date/mediation doesn’t go as planned)

How can you let the other side know about your BATNA in a way that propels them to the negotiating table, not the battleground? The key lies in framing what you say as a warning rather than a threat. At first sight, a warning appears to be similar to a threat, since both convey the negative consequences of no agreement. But there is a critical, if subtle, distinction: A threat appears subjective and confrontational, while a warning appears objective and respectful.

A threat is an announcement of your intention to inflict pain, injury, or punishment on the other side. It is a negative promise. A warning, in contrast, is an advance notice of danger. A threat comes across as what you will do to them if they do not agree. A warning comes across as what will happen if agreement is not reached. A warning, in other words, puts some distance between you and your BATNA. It objectifies the consequences of no agreement so that they appear to result from the situation itself. It is easier for your opponent to bend to objective reality than to back down to you personally.

While a threat is confrontational in manner, a warning is delivered with respect. Present your information in a neutral tone and let the other side decide. The more dire the warning, the more respect you need to show.

from Getting Past No

(more quotes here)