Today's career thinking with you is called win-win thinking。
The word " win-win " is better understood literally, meaning that both partners gain a certain amount of benefit, not lose each other or both. The win-wins are based on the theory of game theory, which is called the “zero-sum game” and the “zero-sum game” is the game of winning and losing, such as gambling, chess, football and so on。
The parties involved in the game, in strict competition, are bound to mean the loss of the other party. The sum of the proceeds and losses of the players is always “zero” and there is no possibility of cooperation between the parties。
With reference to the game theory, it is important to mention the most representative example of “the prisoners' plight”。
The prisoners ' plight was such that two members of a criminal group (a and b) were arrested, they were completely isolated and had absolutely no means of communicating with each other. The police currently lack evidence to convict them for the main crimes they have been complicit in。
The police then set out the terms of their respective transactions:
If both a and b confess their crimes, the sentence is five years each. If a's confession, b's not, a's release, b's 10 years in prison (and vice versa), and if a's and b's statements are not, each of them will be sentenced to one year's imprisonment。
As a result, both individuals chose to confess their crimes and were sentenced to five years ' imprisonment. It's not really the best result, it's that both people chose not to make a confession. This is irrational decision-making by rational people, which reflects the fact that the best choices of individuals are not those of groups。
This is an example of a non-zero-sum game。
In the workplace, one of the conditions we want to achieve is the decision-making by both sides, which maximizes the overall benefits or maximizes the interests of both. There must be some concern about what would make it possible for competitions to win and win
Indeed, in china’s ancient times, there was a very representative win-win situation between the two sides to the war, most typically the one that was misread most, the beautiful empty city of the three countries。
Sema took the fort and zhuang is blaming himself for his negligence. At this point, the sema army approached the west city, and it was not surprising that ge liang had sent his men outside, and it was difficult to return at once, with only some of the old and the weak in the town。
In a crisis, zhugsang sits in the city and drinks and caressssss himself. The sema soldiers were under the city, but did not enter it and returned to the 20-mile road。
Zhu liang's suspected soldiers scared him. But in fact, the screeching and force levels of the j. J. J. J. At the time were by no means as simple as being scared away。
The truth is that for sema, the existence of zhugsang and the threat posed by zhuang are fundamental to its strength in wei. For as long as there is a threat from a country, sema has its worth。
When zhu ge-lang was killed and the battle for wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei wei。
Thus, in this stand-off, it appears that the zuma has fled with fear, but that the choice is a win-win one for both sides. Zhug liang was successful in guarding the city, and sema returned to wei, though condemned, but saved his life。
How can we achieve win-win cooperation or negotiations? Here are some strategies for you:
(1) increased understanding of information and value judgements of the parties
For example, there's a meat bag, both people want it, and if a eats, b doesn't have it. It's a zero-sum game。
But if you know a likes the meat in it, b likes the skin outside. Such cooperation would serve both purposes, namely win-win。
(2) multiple rather than single choices are given to the other side at the same time
We see the plight of prisoners as the result of only one choice. If there were multiple results, one could find out from the results that would be mutually beneficial。
(3) make incremental, from split cake to big cake
Zero-sum games are because we divide our limited resources. But if thinking extends to incremental, there may be a win-win outcome。
For example, at the company, if one of your team members asks you for a raise, it's difficult for you to add that the company's profits are limited and unfair to the rest of its members; exceptionally, no, this very good employee may leave。
So, in such a case, the solution to the win-win thinking is that you can say to the staff that we create conditions for you that, if you try to increase your performance, we can give you a credit for your performance. Incentives are increased in such a way that both the needs of employees and the value added to the enterprise are met。
(4) sometimes a step back may lead to win-win situations
For example: the empty city plan, the performance of semaru confirms this. Retrogression and the realization of the interests of both parties。
Therefore, if we use the win-win thinking more in the workplace or in life, we can find broader spaces and opportunities for cooperation. This is good for both sides. It also benefits the other side and is more conducive to advancing their own profit schemes。
What we are talking about is win-win thinking, how to avoid zero-sum games and how to use win-win thinking to work together. Think about whether you've had some headaches of zero-sum games in your day-to-day work and life and whether you can use win-win thinking to make some changes and turn them into win-win situations。
Columnist
Neo yunhua, public no.: neo yunhua xinjiang, everyone is a columnist for the product manager. Ten years of multinational management consulting, who served with pricewaterhousecoopers, ibm global advisory services, and provided advisory services to chinese companies such as han, haile, tent. Management consultant for several start-up companies. There are major trends in the shared economy。
