This story is exceptionally well told in the book Breakthroughs! by P. Ranganath Nayak and John M. Ketteringham (one of the best casebooks written on innovators who defied the odds), which describes Smith’s culture of mutual commitment as the true breakthrough.

The Most Important Ǫuestion in Strategy – Roger L. Martin

At an impasse, an idea popped into my head. Rather than have them talk about

what they thought was true about the various options, I would ask them to specify what would have to be true for the option on the table to be a fantastic choice. The result was magical. Clashing views turned into collaboration to really understand the logic of the options. Rather than having people attempt to convince others of the merits of options, the options themselves did the convincing (or failed to do so). In this moment, the best role of the consultant became clear to me: don’t attempt to convince clients which choice is best; run a process that enables them to convince themselves.

I first began to understand this system of persuasion through the research and writing of Professor Charles Cialdini (Influence: the Psychology of Persuasion) and Scott Adams (Win Bigly) whose books have become for me two more don’t-leave-the-house-before-you-read-it musts.

Geoffrey Moore’s influential 1991 book, Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling Technology Products to Mainstream Customers. This book popularized academics’ concepts of “network externalities” and “standards lock-in” and was the bible for people who wanted to be, or to spot, the next Microsoft.

Roger Fisher and William Ury, two Harvard law professors, have done some outstanding work in what they call the “principled” approach versus the “positional” approach to bargaining in their tremendously useful and insightful book, Getting to Yes. Although the words Win/Win are not used, the spirit and underlying philosophy of the book are in harmony with the Win/Win approach. They suggest that the essence of principled negotiation is to separate the person from the problem, to focus on interests and not on positions, to invent options for mutual gain, and to insist on objective criteria—some external standard or principle that both parties can buy into.