What Is Win/Win In A Negotiation?
The concept of win/win in negotiation is much talked about, and it’s almost as if this is the only negotiation outcome that we should be seeking.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it’s not!
I’m going to try and dissect this in 2 parts over 2 blogs: firstly, our understanding of “winning” and secondly, whether win/win should be your objective in every negotiation.
What is winning in a negotiation?
Negotiation is about resolving conflict (“conflict” is an emotive word, but it’s mostly not about armed combatants, warring armies and hostages) bringing together two or more parties with different interests to reach an agreement that is satisfactory for everyone.
Ultimately, all parties should be better off for having reached a negotiated agreement, otherwise what’s the point of negotiating in the first place?
Not only should they be better-off, but they also need to feel satisfied with the result, to the extent that they’re willing to implement what’s been agreed. Note: there’s nothing here about the other party being “happy” with the outcome.
After all, we’re responsible for delivering on our own objectives, we’re not responsible for the happiness of the other party!
But as for “winning”, I don’t think that it’s helpful to describe the outcome as such.
Have I “won” if I’ve secured a deal but left value on the negotiation table? Have I “won” if I’ve bargained so hard that I’ve irreparably damaged the relationship with the other party, on whose future cooperation I’m depending?
The term “winning” is subjective, isn’t it?
I prefer to substitute “winning” for “satisfied”. If both parties leave “satisfied” then I consider that to be a “win”😁