From Scientific American"Our concern in this book is with disputes--from divorce to business to international--in which everybody can win." Having thus precisely stated their objective, Brams (a professor of politics at New York University) and Taylor (a professor of mathematics at Union College) lay out a series of procedures whereby disputants can carve up the assets or issues and walk away convinced that the outcome is fair. Two of the procedures--strict alternation in choosing and divide-and-choose--have a long track record; Brams and Taylor offer them with some new modifications. The third procedure, adjusted winner, is their own. "Under this procedure, the two parties begin by independently (that is, secretly) distributing a total of 100 points across all the items to be divided, depending on the relative value they attach to them." The one who put the highest value on a particular item gets it temporarily. Probably one party will win items adding up to more points than the items won by the other party. Then they start transferring items between themselves, in a certain order, until the point totals are equalized--that is the adjustment. The authors describe how their program would work for various kinds of disputes, ranging from the recent divorce of Gary and Lorna Wendt all the way back to King Solomon's division of a disputed baby. They think their procedures "can help parties reduce the frustration, anger, and occasional violence that often accompany escalating demands and endless haggling." Powerful, credible, and applicable . . . the methodology is immaculately detailed. -- FortuneAbout the AuthorSteven J. Brams is professor of politics at New York University. Alan D. Taylor is Marie Louise Bailey Professor of Mathematics at Union College. where can i read fiction books online for free The Win/Win Solution: Guaranteeing Fair Shares to Everyone
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. I recommend it to anyone even remotely interested in this subject ...By Tia A.So, Dr. Brams was actually my professor at NYU and he listed this book (his book) as required reading. At first, that is a put off to most university students, myself included. However Dr. Brams has many published books and papers, probably hundred honestly. The book is written the way he speaks. It certainly isn't riveting literature but it is interesting as he is revolutionary in his field. Some of his techniques are even patented I believe. It was an honor taking his class and this book is interesting and a very unique text. I recommend it to anyone even remotely interested in this subject matter. Very eye opening!2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. An Excellent Place to Start if You Become the Executor of an EstateBy J. ErbesThis book is one of the better places to start if you are about to become involved in the settlement of an estate (perhaps as an executor) and want the process to be as fair as possible while trying to minimize conflict, strife and hard feelings. It is based on the premise that not everyone values items equally, and that difference in valuation can lead to distribution strategies where all parties feel that they received their fair share (or better) of the proceeds. Much of the book explores division strategies that don't work with explanations as to why they don't work, with the last chapters explaining what does work and how to implement it. I have seen some excellent general advice on the internet that expands on these concepts, but it will take some google searches to find it.15 of 15 people found the following review helpful. A Useful Tool, But Not A PanaceaBy Ruth EdlundThis book introduces only one novel concept, which is okay, because many best-sellers contain no original thought at all.Brams and Taylor spend the book explaining the concept "adjusted winner" and its implications for dispute resolution. The authors begin by laying the following framework: the dispute involved is a two-party dispute, goods or issues ("items") are being divided, and the division is a voluntary choice.Within that framework, according to Brams and Taylor, there are four basic ways of dividing items: strict alternation (taking turns); balanced alternation, which adds something to compensate for the disadvantage of going second; one-cuts-the-other- chooses, and "adjusted winner."The "adjusted winner" situation has three characteristics: it is envy-free, efficient, and equitable. Each of these terms has a specific meaning in this book (the concepts can be hard to keep straight on a first reading)."Envy-free" means that no party is willing to give up the portion it receives in exchange for the portion someone else receives."Equitable" means that both parties think they received the same fraction of the total items to be divided, as they value them."Efficient" means that there is no other allocation that is better for some party without being worse for another party.How is this gold standard of negotiation outcome achieved? Ah, there's the rub. First the parties designation the goods and issues in a dispute. Then, each party indicates how much the value obtaining the different goods, or "getting their way" on the different issues, by distributing 100 points across them. Each item is initially assigned to the person who puts more points on it. Then, an equitable allocation is achieved by transferring items, or fractions thereof, from one party to the other until their point totals are equal.The book addresses adequately, I think, the problem of one or both parties being insincere about their preferences (it can be demonstrated mathematically to backfire). However, despite the concrete examples offered of the David and Ivana Trump divorce, the Camp David Agreement, the Clinton-Bush debates, and the Spratly Islands dispute, the reader is left wondering, doggone it, how do I actually assign these point thingies in my next negotiation? And is this method just too fancy to get the folks across the table to buy into? I suspect it probably is.