Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
The win-win habit of leadership is a state of mind and heart that enables an individual to continually pursue or strive for mutual benefit in every human relation or interaction. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, many companies had a significant problem because of the decreased sales. As a result, some companies such as Creative Noggin and General Motors were forced to give their employees work leave. However, employees required that they get paid because the provided leave was against company values, making the two parties engage in a negotiation. The negotiations were based on an agreement that would give a perfect solution for both parties. This made both the employees and employers arrive at a decision where the employees would be paid half the salary because they would not be working, and the company would not get losses for paying the full salary. The two parties arrived at a win-win agreement, making them satisfied. This portrays a win-win approach because of cooperation rather than competition. The above relation shows that leaders should use this relationship within an organization because of its effectiveness.
The Six Paradigms
There are six paradigms involved in an attempt to collaborate or effectively interact with other individuals. These six paradigms were proposed by Covey of how leaders can create a win-win situation in a work setting (Covey, 2017). Naturally, every individual is inclined to lean towards one of these paradigms. As a result, people are inclined to perceive the world with this mindset, which guides us on how to effect collaboration and teamwork. The proposed paradigms include win/lose, lose/ win, win/win, lose/lose, win, and win-win or no deal paradigms.
Win / Win We All Win Paradigm
The win/win paradigm is also known as we all win paradigm. There is no situation of a loser since every single individual is always learning or winning. In this case, every person commits to come to an agreement where every individual does not have feelings of having lost (John et al., 2020). The leadership in Microsoft Company uses this strategy, which enables the organization and the employees to succeed. The company uses empowering strategies to enhance the quality of their employees by bringing the best out of them, allowing them to find meaning in their work and supporting their goals. The culture of Microsoft Company is based on the foundation that anyone can learn, change and grow ( Empowering, 2022). This has made the company engage in multiple programs that enable employees to develop a sense of trust and responsibility with the organizations management. There has been an increasing demand for work-life balance in most organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic, as employees have been undergoing a high level of stress. Microsoft has had an effective strategy that helps its employees with work-life balance even before the pandemic.
Some of the programs that the company leaders have been implementing include coaching and training. These programs have promoted the performance of the employees as well as the companys performance. This is portrayed by the increased revenue that the company had during the pandemic period when other companies were struggling with COVID-19 effects. Its revenue expanded from $ 125,843 to $143,015, portraying significant improvement ( Microsoft, 2021). Their employees benefit from various healthcare coverage such as comprehensive care, 24-hour access to healthcare services, and discounts on health club membership. Other benefits provided include discounted shares when the employees purchase the company shares and backup care, which provides the employees with home care services. This analysis shows that a win/win strategy has a significant outcome for all the parties and helps create good relationships between the involved parties.
The Win / Lose Paradigm
The win/lose paradigm is generally based or built on competition rather than cooperation or collaboration. In this paradigm, the other party has to lose for the other one to win or succeed (Spohn, 2018; Thomas et al., 2018). A perfect case for a win-lose is portrayed by the Apple and Samsung conflict in 2012. During this period, Apple CEO Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Gee-sung Choi were in a conflict taken to the district court of Northern California regarding the patent. Apple was involved with Samsung Company in business negotiations, and Samsung ended up using the look and feel in its Galaxy phones. Samsungs CEO accused Apple of using their wireless transmission technology without payment, leading to multiple conflicts regarding the patents ( Negotiation in Business, 2020). Each company brought up issues in their negotiations, leading to an increased dispute between the two companies. Furthermore, Samsung Company claimed that Apple copied their smartphone and tablet appearance, which was also similar to Apple.
The two companies engaged in a negotiation that led to the removal of certain cases in the court, lowering them to almost half. Despite the willingness of the two to engage in a compromise, Apple later filed a case claiming that the Samsung Galaxy Tablet should be removed from the market as it was a copy-paste from Apples second-generation iPad. The two sides tried to avoid engaging in the legal battle because Samsung is among the largest suppliers of Apple, and the two companies needed each other to conquer the electronic industry ( Negotiation in Business, 2020). However, none of the companies was willing to end the conflict, and Apple moved the case to trial, which made Samsung pay more than 409 million dollars to Apple Company. The move to trial was a winning strategy for Apple as they gained from the negotiation while Samsung lost despite being mutually dependent. The Samsung and Apple case shows that the win/lose paradigm uses authority to achieve the required outcome. However, the approach negatively affects the parties as it creates rivalry.
The Lose / Win Paradigm
In the lose-win paradigm, most individuals prefer to take the resistance in the negotiation path instead of taking the opportunity to make a stand. The individuals inclined to this approach are soft or lenient by nature and are always comfortable conceding to appease the other involved party (Spohn, 2018). Tyson Food employees have had the same with this organization. The company is among the largest poultry producers in the United States of America. Employees in this organization were reported to undergo various mistreatment. They are subjected to poor payment even after working for long hours. Furthermore, the working condition was very dangerous as they operated in close proximity, resulting in accidents as most of the tools used included sharp knives ( Tysons blatant disregard, 2020). The operating area that workers use has various dangerous machinery. The workers are not given time to rest even if they are sick, and most of them are denied basic rights by their leaders and are mocked whenever they ask for improvement in the working conditions
The workers feel overpowered by the organization, which makes them feel defeated. On the other hand, the organization leaders, managers, and the organization benefit from the loss of their employees as they generate a significant profit while the workers get paid low wages and subjected to strict regulations. This is proven by the organizations revenue generation during the 2020 fiscal year, as the company had an increased revenue of 43.2 billion dollars ( Tyson Foods Reports, 2021). This was a significant increase from the previous years revenue, implying a win on their side. The effect of this paradigm is that after some time, the relationship between the two parties significantly deteriorates, leading to a lose-lose outcome for both parties.
The Lose / Lose Paradigm
The lose/lose paradigm can result from the win-lose paradigm, where both parties clash and do not withdraw. This is an approach where one party is very willing to lose to make sure that the other party fails as well. This can be because they are vindictive and believe that they must succeed in the process if the other party is losing (Covey, 2017). In 2021, there were 14 strikes in the healthcare sector where the workers demanded to fulfill certain requirements. During the strike period, the workers opted for a lose-lose situation; they did not complete their duties, and the healthcare sectors suffered enormous financial and health losses. The two parties had not agreed on staffing issues, employee retention, patient care, and healthcare working conditions (Gooch, 2021). However, if they had agreed, the two parties could have won. From the above example, a lose-lose results from a disagreement between the two parties, which could be resolved through compromise.
Win Paradigm
In the winning paradigm, individuals are more concerned about themselves and ensuring that they succeed. As a result, the leaders do not consider the result since they are more concerned about winning and are not focused on the loss of the other party. For instance, G4S Wackenhut has been mentioned among the companies that take money from their poor employees, and in the process, the company develops itself while the employees are left struggling. From 2005 to 2020, the company has been collecting money from its workers through various cheating styles such as future developments (Campbell & Yerardi, 2022). The leaders and managers in the organization have been the pioneers in this issue as they lead growth and development in the company. In this situation, imbalance in life, distrust, and resentment may arise if one party succeeds and the other loses, similar to the win-lose paradigm.
Win-Win or No Deal Paradigm
The win-win paradigm ensures that both parties that are involved benefit. This paradigm enables leaders to establish rapport and develop a deep relationship. As a result, the majority of individuals often strive to employ this approach. It is imperative that all the parties give their perception on an issue or project without being threatened. Google Company uses this strategy to enhance their performance as well as employees performance. The company has career development plans that create employees successful growth and ensure their long-term performance ( Google, 2022). Incentives are provided to the employees depending on their levels of professionalism as well as personal progress. Programs such as Career Guru have been implemented to encourage employees to develop their careers despite securing a job at Google Company. This is enforced by the leaders who have various roles in the organization. The company CEO believes in fostering creativity within the organization, which creates a suitable business culture where the employees are motivated, satisfied, and happy. Google employees are encouraged to provide their ideas regarding certain issues. They are provided with a comprehensive working environment since the company provides an environment where employees views are strongly considered.
The company has created an environment where the leaders and employees trust each other such that no one is left out. The leaders ensure that they succeed together as a community. The employees are urged to collaborate and the organizations leadership for mutual benefit. This has been enhanced by various programs such as extracurricular activities and Googler to Googler, which keeps them productive. The organization has multiple forums at the end of the week where the leaders respond to the weeks inquiries, and advice is provided from both sides ( Google, 2022). This approach enables individuals to acquire a solution to a challenging situation that will profit both parties. In this case, the goals of one party can be aligned with the other partys goals. As a result, relationships can be maintained while honoring values if the situation does not end in a no-deal.
Conclusion
In conclusion, leaders have the role of ensuring that there is always a good relationship among employees. The best way to ensure quality relationships within an organization is to use the win-win approach. The win-win approach enables the individual to benefit from every human relationship. It has six paradigms that guide in creating win-win relationships in an organization. The six paradigms include win/lose, lose/ win, win/win, lose/lose, win, and win-win or no deal paradigms. The above examples on paradigms show that an organizations outcome depends on the model that the leader selects.
References
Campbell, A., & Yerardi, J. (2022). How companies rip off poor employees and get away with it. Ap News. Web.
Covey, S. (2017). The 7 habits of highly effective people. Infographics.
Empowering our employees | Microsoft CSR. Microsoft. (2022). Web.
Gooch, K. (2021). US healthcare workers walk off the job: 14 strikes in 2021. Beckershospitalreview.com. Web.
Google employee engagement. Comparably. (2022). Web.
John, E., Sureshkumar, S., Sankar, T., & Divya, K. (2020). Phycoremediation in aquaculture; a win-win paradigm. Environmental Technology Reviews, 9(1), 67-84. Web.
Microsoft 2020 Annual Report. Microsoft.com. (2021). Web.
Negotiation in Business: Apple and Samsungs dispute resolution case study. PON Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School. (2020). Web.
Spohn, D. (2018). An operational definition of effective leadership: Was Covey right?. Review of Public Administration and Management, 06(01), 2-6. Web.
Thomas, S., Eastman, J., Shepherd, D., & Denton, L. (2018). A comparative assessment of win-win and win-lose negotiation strategy use on supply chain relational outcomes. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 29(1), 191-215. Web.
Tyson Foods reports strong fourth quarter and fiscal 2020 results company remains focused on worker health and safety, long term growth. Tysonfoods. (2021). Web.
Tysons blatant disregard for its own employees shows how broken the corporate food system is. Press-citizen. (2020). Web.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.