Chapter 3WIN–win Negotiation
Myth and Reality
The Myth of Win–Win
Negotiation experts (and amateurs) have been preaching win–win for some time. The trouble is, it's unrealistic. The expression win–win has become more of a pop cliché than a negotiating philosophy. It's either a winner's rationalization for lopsided triumph, a loser's excuse for surrender, or both sides' phrase for when everybody is equally unhappy. There's rarely such thing as both parties winning identically, that is, both getting all of what they want. One party is bound to get more and one less, even if both sides are content with the outcome. The latter is possible. Both parties can be satisfied, but both do not usually win to the same degree.
The Reality of WIN–win
If someone is going to come out ahead, it would be great if it's you, but at the very least you maximize your interests.
For example, in the $10 bill game in Chapter 1, rather than quickly retreat to a division of $4 for you and $6 for them, one way to maximize your return is by making change, a split of $5.01 and $4.99. Even if you end up with the $4.99, you have substantially increased your return over the $4 split.
WIN–win is realistic. It isn't easy—it requires focus and discipline but it is achievable. And it doesn't turn negotiation into war. Because it's not WIN–lose, WIN–clobber, or WIN–ransack-pillage-and-obliterate, you don't have to destroy the other side. On the contrary, you want ...
Get The Power of Nice, Revised and Updated now with the O’Reilly learning platform.
O’Reilly members experience books, live events, courses curated by job role, and more from O’Reilly and nearly 200 top publishers.
