Extreme Anchors and the Overton Window
How Bold Positions Shape Outcomes—And What to Do When You’re on the Other Side
As a CIO, negotiation is part of my daily work—whether it’s advocating for ideas, allocating resources, or diplomatically saying “no.” Fifteen years ago, I took a course from Chester Karrass, a renowned negotiator, after reading about him in an airline magazine. Though the course focused on sales, I walked away with a deeper understanding of topics like concessions, overcoming an impasse, and competitive vs. cooperative negotiations. More recently, I’ve explored Chris Voss’s approach, which focuses on relationship-building and what he calls “tactical empathy.”
In today’s Dispatch, I explore one of the most powerful—and often misunderstood—tactics in negotiation: extreme anchoring. We’ll look at how it works, why it’s effective, and how to recognize and respond to it in high-stakes conversations. Whether you’re leading change, shaping policy, or navigating institutional politics, knowing how to use extreme anchors—and respond to them—is a skill worth mastering.
Why it matters
“The Overton Window” might be the most overused phrase in political and social commentary today. But behind the buzzword is a powerful idea: public opinion—and organizational consensus—is always shifting. And often, it’s being shifted on purpose.
In politics, business, and leadership, extreme anchoring—the act of proposing something bold, unorthodox, or even outrageous—is one of the most effective ways to move the window of what others see as acceptable or possible.
Whether you’re running for office, managing a tech budget, or reshaping institutional policy, it’s crucial to understand when you’re encountering extreme anchoring—and how to use it strategically yourself.
Three Examples of Extreme Anchors and Shifting Debates
Trump and NATO Spending
In 2016 and again in 2024, Donald Trump shocked allies by suggesting the U.S. might not come to the defense of NATO members who failed to meet their military spending commitments. The message was controversial—but it was also a textbook case of extreme anchoring. Trump wasn’t the first to raise concerns. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had long warned that Europe was overreliant on the U.S.—even for basic military readiness like ammunition stockpiles. But by voicing those frustrations in such blunt, provocative terms, Trump moved the Overton Window. Suddenly, decades of underinvestment were front and center, and NATO allies began significantly boosting their defense budgets. What was once off-limits to even question became a matter of public debate and measurable change.
Warren, Sanders, and Student Loan Forgiveness
Long before the Biden administration took action, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were the loudest voices pushing for large-scale student debt cancellation—an extreme anchor. Their advocacy moved the Overton Window—transforming a once-taboo idea into a central plank of the progressive agenda.
President Biden, initially hesitant, ultimately adopted the policy under pressure from his party’s base. His Department of Education implemented a series of forgiveness initiatives—some blocked, some upheld—that have now canceled over $150 billion in student debt.
What began as a fringe idea is now mainstream Democratic policy. The shift wasn’t led by Biden alone—but he cemented it, proving how sustained political pressure and strategic positioning can redefine what’s possible.
Google and the Gigabyte Gambit
In the early 2000s, free email services like Hotmail and Yahoo offered storage in the tens or hundreds of megabytes—just enough for a handful of emails and attachments. When Google’s founders set out to launch Gmail, they anchored the idea around something radical: give users a full gigabyte of free storage—at a time when that seemed technologically and economically out of reach.
The engineers pushed back. Storage was expensive, and such a move seemed infeasible. But the bold target reframed what was possible. Instead of settling for industry norms, Google’s engineers innovated, developing breakthroughs in high-density storage systems and infrastructure that made their vision attainable.
That extreme anchor didn’t just create Gmail—it redefined the standard for what users could expect from cloud-based email. What started as an outrageous demand became the benchmark that everyone else had to meet. In doing so, Google shifted the Overton Window of user expectations and technical feasibility in cloud services.
Why this strategy works
These aren’t just bold ideas—they’re classic examples of extreme anchoring, a powerful negotiation strategy used to shape outcomes before real debate even begins.
Chester Karrass, a pioneer in business negotiation, taught that if you don’t make the first offer, you’ve already ceded control. An extreme anchor may not be accepted outright, but it defines the terms of the conversation and pulls every counteroffer closer to your preferred outcome.
The psychology is simple:
When one side opens with a bold, even unreasonable position, it forces the other party to react. Instead of advancing their own agenda, they’re now defending the status quo—or scrambling to define a middle ground. Either way, the anchor sets the range of acceptable discussion.
It’s not about bullying—it’s about framing.
Extreme anchors shift the Overton Window, making previously unthinkable ideas feel mainstream and forcing everyone else to negotiate on unfamiliar ground.
And when that anchor is eventually walked back or softened? It feels like a concession—even if the final agreement was the goal all along.
Extreme anchoring shows up in politics, business, and policy negotiations all the time. Sometimes it’s subtle. Other times, it’s loud and public. But the strategy is always the same: Set the frame. Shift the window. Control the outcome.
The bottom line
So how should leaders, negotiators, and the media respond when faced with extreme anchoring? Chris Voss, former FBI hostage negotiator and author of Never Split the Difference, offers key strategies:
Ignore the anchor and reframe the conversation – The best way to neutralize an extreme position is not to engage with it directly, but to shift the discussion to what matters. When confronted, respond with “You must have a reason for wanting/saying/thinking that” or “How am I supposed to do that?”
Use calibrated questions – Instead of pushing back aggressively, ask, “How do you see that working in practice?” This forces the person making the extreme claim to justify and refine their position, often pulling it back toward reason.
Be patient—don’t react emotionally – Extreme anchors are designed to trigger strong reactions. The most effective response is to stay calm, strategic, and deliberate in negotiation.
The real question isn’t whether extreme anchoring works—it’s how to counter it without getting pulled into the Overton Window shift. Engaging on its terms reinforces and legitimizes extreme positions. The power lies in recognizing the tactic, staying grounded, and reframing the conversation. Those who fail to do so react to the shifting window, not shaping the debate.