Conflict resolution is one of the best ways to help members of large companies and other such groups to help themselves stay together and work out problems. But many times, an ideal resolution is not only hard to come by, it is downright impossible to create. Logistically, compromise is always better than "win-win", but why, then, are most people encouraged to find a "win-win" solution for their problems if it does not work out anyway?
In the episode "Conflict Resolution" from the television series "The Office" (US), Michael Scott, the manager, attempts to "solve" all of the conflicts that have sprung up in the office. On of the more notable examples was a dispute of a poster in shared workspace. One employee wanted it up, the other down. The most reasonable solution was the compromise (the poster was up on Tuesday and Thursday), but for one of the more hilarious moments of the episode, the "win-win" (win, for the fans) solution was used (making the poster into a tee shirt, which the one who hated it, would wear). While contributing to the episode's jokes, this example just serves as an illustration of the illogicality of the "win-win" mentality.
It is a fact of life; you cannot please everyone all of the time. It is impossible to do so, nor is it even remotely reasonable to try. Idealism, in this case, fails in the face of bleak reality. It is better to cut your losses and compromise on a combined solution that is as fair as possible to all the parties involved.
The"win-win" (win!) mentality fails on two levels. It is part of the reason we have so many problems in this world, as everyone attempts to simultaneously get everything they want and please everyone else, and it simply perpetuates pseudo-reality. When you live in idealism, you do not allow yourself to experience reality, which unfortunately, can be quite negative.
I may sound like a pessimist, but I am a realist (which may actually be the same thing sometimes). Perhaps we should think on the bright side, but we should not live in it. We would be so much better off with everyone understanding this truth.
Please check out my blog "The Parent Generation." The truth is that once one accepts that there is no "win-win" solution, they have committed to stop looking for one. I don't think that we or our leaders can afford to make that mistake in this age. Too much is at stake.
Interesting, but if everyone accepts the fact that there is never going to be an ideal solution, they will also try looking for the next best one, so maybe it is better to sacrifice looking for the ideal situation in order to have people looking for the best solution, one that will work logistically and allow everyone to at least live with the end result.
As a peace and conflict resolution student, I look at these problems everyday from the level of individuals to violent conflict between states. I agree with you that not all idealistic (ideal objectives are not always idealistic/unrealistic) resolutions work--such as The Office episode, but those are extremes. From what I have found and studied in my field--win-win options are compromises. Win-win does not mean that both parties get what they want (they cannot both have an apple if there is only one apple), but win-win can mean both parties get their needs (and sometimes desires) met. If one party wants the skin of the apple to make jam and the other wants the meat of the apple to eat, then the conflict can be "transformed" and both parties needs are met. If both parties want to eat the apple, it can be cut in half and the conflict can be "managed." Either of these can be win-win situations/compromises because they allow each party to be satisfied even though they had to change their views on what they wanted to achieve the compromise.
The problem is not that we live idealistically. It is that people do not understand how they can manage and transform their conflicts. You can't have an idealistic solution (have your cake and eat it too) because many times the idealistic solution will not satisfy the needs of both parties and thus will not end the conflict--as is seen in The Office episode. What needs to be done is for each party to understand the needs of the other, reevaluate their position in order to compromise, and come to an agreement where they can both win. Win-win is not idealism, win-win is compromise (if done correctly).