We have won many times, in work, in some silly debates, in play or in some arguments which could have given a well deserved output. Winning may always sound sweet to an individual or a group, but there are moments when this feeling just fade away. Often we realize that there could have been a possibility that some more content could have been added to the confrontation to make both parties satisfied. Its not at all about negotiations. It’s about presenting an optimal solution to a problem where both sides could be benefited but without affecting the actual result/output as a whole. Of course the theory may sound impractical but putting a bit of extra efforts we could do that.One silly example which I could figure out write now is the problem of getting change ($10). We go to a vendor and buy a less value product instead of actually asking him for change. And there is it, we have two happy sides. Another example I remember which is derived from the nature itself. There is fish specie that makes sure, that when they die, there dead body is close to the baby eggs, so that the eggs get proper diet.
People often get confused between win-win model and a ‘compromise’ model. It’s not about sharing or giving away what we have, it’s about having that vital spirit which forces our senses to strive for that extra bit, not for us, but for others as well.
"People often get confused between win-win model and a ‘compromise’ model."
ReplyDeleteI think compromise is supposed to be a lose-lose model.
At the end it seems that everything is in the mind. How you see a solution can change it from being a compromise to a win-win.