Negotiation is one of the most significant means of resolving disputes and providing an effective communication. There are two main types of this issue such as distributive and integrative negotiations. Both types have their own scope and features. Directly speaking, the negotiation is the communion between the parties to achieve their objectives, in which each party has an equal opportunity to control the situation and make a decision. In a narrow sense, it is considered as a method of the alternative dispute resolution. In a broader sense, the negotiation is the communicational interaction between people or social groups. In the process of communion, participants can provide an exchange of all kinds of information.
Considering the fact that this issue is rather broad and consists of numerous independent aspects, it was decided to focus on one of them, namely the "win-win strategies". Nowadays, there is a problem concerning the overuse of this notion without its proper understanding. Thus, many people use the common knowledge explaining these strategies and do not understand features of its application. In order to provide an effective analysis of the chosen category, it is necessary to study the opposite thoughts concerning the "win-win" strategies and compare them. The first recognized scholar is Robert B. Maddux, who provided the unique approach towards the negotiation strategies in the book Successful Negotiation: Effective "Win-Win" Strategies and Tactics (2005). Another recognized scholar, John K. Butler, in his work 'Behaviors, Trust, and Goal Achievement in a Win-Win Negotiating Role Play' (2005), studied the dependence between the party's behaviour and the result of the dispute. Additionally, he researched the interrelation between the mutual confidence and own interests of participants.
Basic Concepts of "Win-Win" Strategies
The "win-win" principle is a common model of business negotiations, which arose in the 80s, at the same time with the principle of a mutual cooperation. The main provisions of the model are: any situation in business negotiations can lead either to a failure for both sides (the "lose-lose" situation), to a gain of one party (the "win-lose" situation), or to win on both sides (the "win-win" situation), when the interests of both parties are fully considered, and each participant of the negotiation receives the desired result. The last scenario is the most preferred and effective. In order to develop the "win-win" negotiation, both parties must follow certain principles: do not conduct a positional bargaining; provide the difference between parties of a conversation and discussed problems (that is not going into personals) to focus on the real interests of the parties and do not provide the principal position; invent beneficial ways to resolve a dispute and insist on using the objective criteria. Due to its conformity to ethical principles, the approach gained many followers (Liu & Wang 2010).
The choice of this negotiation strategy is the most optimal in many cases. It helps to lay the foundation of a fruitful long-term cooperation, because negotiators perceive each other not as rivals, but as partners. In addition, each participant of the negotiations is willing to sacrifice something that is not too valuable, and the partner, in turn, also donates something from him or her. It is a strategy of a mutually beneficial compromise. In this case, it does not mean that it is necessary to yield all significant interests (Marks & Harold 2011). The characteristic of this strategy is to get desired benefits, otherwise such negotiations cannot be considered as successful. The effective usage of this negotiation strategy is only possible if both negotiators are willing to make every effort to find a mutually beneficial solution. Sometimes, the strategy "win" can be allocated separately, when one partner is set to achieve the desired result without taking into consideration interests of the opponent. However, usually, it quickly transforms into the "win - lose" or "win - win" strategy. Subsequently, as it was mentioned above, the "win-win" concept is the most successful; nevertheless, the choice of the approach is fully depended on the particular situation (Olekalns & Smith 2005).
Robert B. Maddux's Approach to Effective "Win-Win" Strategies
The necessity to analyse the book Effective "Win-Win" Strategies and Tactics (2005) lies in the fact that the author of this work, Robert B. Maddux, provided the full explanation of carrying out the effective negotiation using the "win-win" strategies. The first necessary issue, which is described by this scientist, is the effective ways to acquire all important information concerning the matter in dispute that can give the sufficient advantage over opponent. Considering the fact that, as was mentioned in previous section, the "win-win" concept is based on the main aim to satisfy the interests of both sides, the techniques, which should be used, also need to be selected properly in order to establish a high level of the psychological comfort not only for one side. Despite the fact that mental factors were analysed by the chosen author only partially, this issue was studied fully.
The empirical research of Robert B. Maddux was supported by appropriate case studies and examples (2005). Thus, the different complex situations were analysed, and the most effective ways for their resolutions were designed. One of the most topical subjects of the negotiation is a starting salary. Being aware of this problem, Maddux explained several important points concerning the carrying out the effective conversation with usually a more experienced partner.
Generally, with regard to the conformity between the title and the course of the research, the authors did not perpetrate any deviation from the outlined course of the research. The authors have shown their proficiency, and the material was outlined accurately and comprehensively; while the empirical substantiation lacks evidences, the theoretical background is flawless. Relating the implementation and interpretation of ideas, it is justified to speculate that the ideas and evidence are concordant, with the conclusions being entirely substantiated and completely based on the thesis statement, the ascertained evidence and combination of the theories.
Analysing the scientific paper, which describes the successfulness of "win-win" strategies, there is the urgent need to mention that this concept has several weak points and find out how these disadvantages was overcome by the author. Thus, some scientists support the view that it is impossible to up build the effective negotiation using the "win-win" strategies (Pan, Luo, Meng & Miao 2012). The argumentation is based on the fact that initially, the negotiation has the aim to defeat the interlocutor and support the own interests as effective as possible, because the nature of a discussion lies in the fact that parties must find the common solution, which is based on opposite interests. Subsequently, it is impossible to find the decision that fully considers the requirements of both sides, and there cannot be two "wins" (Ferrin, Bligh & Kohles 2007). The presence of numerous successful negotiations based on this strategy can be explained by the primordial aimlessness of negotiations and lack of a strong position. The foregoing assumptions were indirectly refuted by Robert B. Maddux. This scholar established the effective scheme of the felicitous negotiation, based on "win-win", which provides the possibility to consider interests of both parties and find the joint solution. This research is supplemented by practical examples and case studies, which prove its reliability.
John K. Butler Achievements Considering Effective "Win-Win" Strategies
In his work 'Behaviors, Trust, and Goal Achievement in a Win-Win Negotiating Role Play', John K. Butler provided the study of negotiators' behaviours and their relation to the result of the communication (2005). This work was chosen because it appropriately supplements the achievements of the first analysed book, giving the analysis of the negotiators' inner attitude. John K. Butler (2005) developed the concept of trust in business talks. Thus, besides the general rules of negotiating, which are summarized in the book Effective "Win-Win" Strategies and Tactics, there are additional factors that can improve the possibility to finish the conversation successfully. When parties trust each other, it helps to establish friendly relationships and find a compromise. This issue has the strong connection with the "win-win" concept, because this approach allows finding the common decision without significant losses from both sides (Thompson, Wang & Gunia 2011).
The aforementioned disagreement with the successfulness of the "win-win" strategy is based on the impossibility to ensure the win for both sides. The provided by John K. Butler concept of trust explains this feature through the statement that the atmosphere of confidence can promote attempts to find a joint solution and ingratiate parties to meet halfway (2005). Consequently, there is the necessity to emphasize that a good psychological relation between negotiators and atmosphere of trust are the main contributors of the effective "win-win" strategy. This assumption is proved by the fact that the majority of fruitful business contacts were established between reliable partners, who knew each other very well and could afford to create relationships of trust (Smith 2005).
Additionally, John K. Butler examines the situation, when it is necessary to establish such relations without the long-term cooperation (2005). For this purpose, it was decided to carry out a scientific experiment, attracting several hundred of management students, who had the aim to conduct negotiations. As a result, the increase of trust was connected with the distribution of opponents' interests. On the contrary, if a person supports his or her own interests, it decreases the level of trust. Thus, the scholar managed to conclude that the process of carrying out of business talks with the use of the "win-win" strategy is complicated by the inverse ratio between negotiator's interest and the level of opponent's trust (Bigley & Pearce1998).
Having evaluated the scientific and practical significance of the article, it can be stated that the title of the article is entirely consistent with the contents; the researchers have profoundly and methodically explored the research issues and applied all the empirical and theoretical evidence correctly and logically. Although the connection between the ideas and evidences appears to be questioned, the conclusions are relatively logical, and only a further exploration of the research questions may help to identify the alleged flaws of the study.
Having conducted this study, it is possible to conclude that the content of the reviewed works completely meets the objective of their titles; the studies provide the target audience with a detailed overview of the declared topic. The application of the evidences and ideas has been done coherently and consecutively, and the summary of the article is consistent with the content.
The "win-win" negotiation strategies are very popular and used very often due to their numerous advantages. In order to analyse the compilation of main concepts of this issue, it was decided to overview the book Successful Negotiation: Effective "Win-Win" Strategies and Tactics, written by Robert B. Maddux (2005). This scientific work provided the full explanation of carrying out the effective negotiation using the "win-win" strategies; moreover, all the mentioned theoretical points were supported by practical examples and case studies. Nevertheless, in order to refute the thoughts concerning the futility of these strategies, it was important to find the explanation of the question why parties can have a purpose to consider opponent's interests. John K. Butler (2005) managed to answer this question through the developing of a trust relationships concept, which serves as the main contributor to carrying out the effective negotiation using the "win-win" strategies.