Is 50/50 always the best solution?


Have you ever had a disagreeement with someone and decided to "compromise" by meeting each other half way: the 50/50 solution?

I think there's a more realistic way to deal with disagreement that includes an element I rarely see acknowledged in such discussions.

A scenario:

Sukrit and and Joanne are deciding what to do on an upcoming three week vacation. The discussion starts with each of them talking about where they would like to go and they narrow it down to two possibilities: Joanne wants to travel to Europe and Sukrit says he'd prefer to spend the time camping near home.

Clearly the two options are mutually exclusive. They both begin to defend their stated preference and the conversation gets more heated, each becoming more entrenched in their vacation choice.

A common response to such a situation is to "compromise". In the above example it could mean camping locally for a few days or a week, then heading to Europe for two weeks, or starting with Europe and camping for a weekend upon their return, among other possibilities.

Often this is a reasonable approach, resulting in an agreeable solution. What I see as limiting is that we rarely include the crucial factor of how important the activities are to each of the people involved. What if Sukrit needs some quiet time to recharge from his stressful job? What if the trip to Europe would include a last chance for Joanne to see a newfound elderly relative who could fill her in on some family history? Of course the gradations of importance are usually less dramatic then these examples but the principle still applies.

Sometimes I think it's useful to take a minute and talk about how important each choice is. This is easily expressed on a scale (one to ten, say). What sometimes happens is that one person has no great stake in either option (they're at 0 or 1), while the other may score her need at the high end of the scale (maybe even a 10). Such a conversation is far likelier to result in the greatest need being satisfied and of both participants jointly creating the most appropriate outcome.

And regardless of the result, the potential is increased for each person to feel heard and to have their needs more accurately reflected in the final decision.