Discussion: Relating Strategically to Others
In the internationally-bestselling strategy book, Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life, authors Dixit and Nalebuff teach strategies from game theory that can help individuals and organizations to win in competitive relationships. They teach how to anticipate the response of a rival and how to beat the rival. This book advocates competition, and does so appropriately, as sometimes we must compete. Sometimes we compete against adversaries, or even evil people or organizations or governments, that must be defeated. However, all of life is not about competing.
In the readings from Covey, you learned about "Six Paradigms of Human Interaction," one of which was "Win-Win or No Deal." Covey considers this the most ideal of the human interactions and gives a number of reasons why. Clearly, this is a means to cooperate rather than compete.
Questions:
1) How does Dixit & Nalebuff's approach equate to Covey's "Win-Lose" paradigm?
2) How do you think most people see the majority of human interactions, as opportunities to compete or to cooperate?
3) Can Covey's "Win-Win or No Deal" approach be "strategic" in the ultimate effects it may accrue?
4) How would you compare and contrast the competitive approach of Dixit and Nalebuff versus the cooperative approach of Covey?
5) Which of the six paradigms of human interaction do you operate out of most often? Would it help you to expand your repertoire of positive, effective, strategic interactions?
The response should include a reference list. Double-space, using Times New Roman 12 pnt font, one-inch margins, and APA style of writing and citations.