If they choose to have a primarily win-win cooperative-competitive relationship, they must take into consideration what is really important to the other and try to give it to them in exchange for them reciprocating. #changingworldorder#principleoftheday (1/6)
In that type of win-win relationship, they can have tough negotiations done with respect and consideration, competing like two friendly merchants at a bazaar or two friendly teams at the Olympics. (2/6)
If they choose to have a lose-lose mutually threatening relationship they will primarily think about how they can hurt the other in the hope of forcing the other into a position of fear in order to get what they want. (3/6)
In that type of lose-lose relationship they will have more destructive wars than productive exchanges. (4/6)
Having win-win relationships is obviously better than having lose-lose relationships, but they are often very difficult to have, which brings me to the prisoner’s dilemma dynamic. (5/6)
For the complete picture of how things work and where we are, my book, Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, is available here: amazon.com/Changing-World… (6/6)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So long as you bear the consequences of failure, you are the ultimate Responsible Party. #principleoftheday (1/6)
For example, while you might choose to delegate the responsibility of figuring out how to handle your illness to a doctor, it is your responsibility to pick the right one, since you will bear the consequences if he does a bad job. (2/6)
Or if you were building a house, would you go to an architect and say "show me the kinds of houses I can build" or would you tell the architect what kind of house you want to live in? (3/6)
Ultimately, power will rule. This is true of any system. #principleoftheday (1/5)
For example, it has repeatedly been shown that systems of government have only worked when those with the power value the principles behind the system more than they value their own personal objectives. (2/5)
When people have both enough power to undermine a system and a desire to get what they want that is greater than their desire to maintain the system, the system will fail. (3/5)
While all these principles exist for the well-being of the community, there may come times when adhering to them could threaten the community's well-being. #principleoftheday (1/5)
For example, we encountered a time when there were leaks to the media of some things that we made radically transparent within Bridgewater. (2/5)
People at Bridgewater understood that our transparency about our weaknesses and mistakes was being used to present distorted and harmful pictures of Bridgewater, so we had to lessen our level of transparency until we resolved that problem. (3/5)
You are expected to go to the higher level and look down on yourself and others as part of a system. (1/4)
In other words, you must get out of your own head, consider your views as just some among many, and look down on the full array of points of view to assess them in an idea-meritocratic way rather than just in your own possessive way. (2/4)
Seeing things from the higher level isn't just seeing other people's point of view; it's also being able to see every situation, yourself, and others in the situation as though you were looking down on them as an objective observer. (3/4)
A decision-making group in which those who don't get what they want continue to fight rather than work for what the group has decided is destined to fail... #principleoftheday (1/4)
...you can see this happening all the time in companies, organizations, and even political systems and nations. I'm not saying that people should pretend they like the decision if they don't, or that the matter in question can't be revisited at a future date. (2/4)
What I am saying is that in order to be effective, all groups that work together have to operate with protocols that allow time for disagreements to be explored... (3/4)
Almost every group that agrees on the big things ends up fighting about less important things and becoming enemies even though they should be bound by the big things. #principleoftheday (1/5)
This phenomenon is called the narcissism of small differences. Take the Protestants and Catholics. Though both are followers of Christ, some of them have been fighting for hundreds of years... (2/5)
...even though many of them are unable to articulate the differences that divide them, and most of those who can articulate the differences realize that they are insignificant relative to the big important things that should bind them together. (3/5)