The idea of win-win has a long story.

There is a classic among the negotiation books: “Getting to Yes” by Roger Fisher and William Ury. In it, the authors highlight the difference between positions and interests. How to focus on interest was explained with the now famous “orange story.”

Despite the existence of the “orange story” it is often forgotten that there can be a distinction between position and interest. It means that negotiations will often be understood as having to find the right compromise that will satisfy those involved. That is, the people involved are seen as wanting something different that can only be solved by a compromise.

The idea of win-win as such seems to originate in Mary Parker Folett’s work. She understood and explained the difference between “power with” and “power over.”

It’s a difference that is often misunderstood when searching for a “win-win” solution. The win-win idea is perceived in opposition to a “win-lose” situation in which one of the parties in the negotiation perceives himself as needing to have power over the other.

That can be true if the conversation occurs during a negotiation or to resolve a conflict.

A very different situation occurs when a team has a conversation to find the best possible action moving forward. Despite a possibly heated debate, there is no conflict of interest, there only is a common exploration of possible solutions.

Introducing the idea of win-win in such a situation immediately splits the team up into a group of individuals. They now find themselves in a situation where using persuasion to find ways to win over others has become the rule.

It transforms the situation from one where the team can experience an attitude of “power-with” to an attitude of figuring out how to have “power over.”