I’ve seen your post on how to compromise in romantic relationships, do you have one on how to compromise in platonic and familial relationships?
Writing Notes: Compromise
in Platonic & Familial Relationships
People with a compromising conflict style often try to resolve conflict by proposing seemingly equal compromises, such as meeting in the middle between two extreme positions or making a significant compromise just to move forward. Although a compromising conflict style can move a conversation forward, the solution may not address root issues, making this style unstable over time.
Compromise is essential in any relationship, particularly during conflict. Each partner must consider giving something up of similar value so that they meet somewhere in the middle (Grieger, 2015).
Encourage bouncing ideas off each other until both parties find a win for both of them. Capture the following:
What is the disagreement about?
What does a win for each person look like?
Brainstorm ideas that could lead to mutual satisfaction.
Often, resolutions to conflict and disagreement feel like a win to both parties; this is a win–win situation. The goal should be for mutual satisfaction.
The more individuals have a relational focus (i.e., a greater use of “we”) while narrating their experiences of compromise with family, the better psychological health they will experience (Lin et al., 2014)
The Conflict Management Styles
Include accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, competing and compromising.
People tend to have a dominant style.
The Thomas Kilmann conflict mode instrument, or TKI, is frequently used in conflict resolution training and identifies 5 distinct modes that people use to handle conflict (Thomas & Kilman).
Understanding your conflict handling style may help you handle future conflicts more effectively.
Compromising - usually indicates the person who is compromising is at the mid-point on the assertiveness scale and the mid-point on the cooperativeness scale.
That means that the compromiser tries to find middle-ground by taking care of his/her needs as well as the needs of others.
The compromiser does try to cooperate but not at his/her personal expense.
The compromising style shows a moderate concern for self and others.
Even though you may often hear that the best way to handle a conflict is to compromise, the compromising style is not a win/win solution but a partial win/lose.
When you compromise, you give up some or most of what you want.
The conflict gets resolved temporarily, but lingering thoughts of what you gave up could lead to a future conflict.
Compromising may be a good strategy when time limitations or conflict prolonging may lead to relationship deterioration.
Compromise may also be good when both parties have equal power or other resolution strategies have not worked (Macintosh & Stevens, 2008).
Compromising may help conflicting parties come to a resolution, but neither may be completely satisfied if they each had to give something up.
Compromising Style: This style aims to find an expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties in the conflict while maintaining some assertiveness and cooperativeness. “This style is best to use when the outcome is not crucial and you are losing time; for example, when you want to just make a decision and move on to more important things and are willing to give a little to get the decision made,” Dr. Barbara Benoliel, a certified professional mediator and mitigation specialist, says. “However,” she adds, “be aware that no one is really satisfied.”
People often get accommodating and compromising confused.
Accommodating means sacrificing your needs/wants/desires for what the other wants without them giving anything in return.
When you compromise, both parties give something and gain something.
A negative of compromising is that it may be used as an easy way out of a conflict.
The compromising style is most effective when both parties find the solution reasonably agreeable.
Example: Rosa and D’Shaun could decide that Casey’s allowance does need to be increased and could each give her $10.00 more a week by committing to taking their lunch to work twice a week instead of eating out. They are giving up something, and if neither has a problem taking their lunch to work, the compromise is equitable. If the couple agrees that the 20 extra dollars a week should come out of D’Shaun’s golf budget, the compromise is not as equitable, and D’Shaun, although he agreed to the compromise, may end up with feelings of resentment. Dialogue may assist this couple to find a win-win outcome.
In the Workplace. Compromising is a conflict resolution strategy in which you and the other party willingly forfeit some of your needs to reach an agreement.
It’s known as a “lose-lose” strategy, since neither of you achieve your full goal.
This strategy works well when your care for your goal and the relationship are both moderate. You value the relationship, but not so much that you abandon your goal, like in accommodation.
Example: Maybe you and a peer express interest in leading an upcoming project. You could compromise by co-leading it or deciding one of you leads this one and the other the next one.
Compromising requires big-picture thinking and swallowing your pride, knowing you won’t get all your needs fulfilled.
The benefits are that you and the other party value your relationship and make sacrifices to reach a mutually beneficial resolution.
Never Light a Cigarette After a Meal - Here's Why!
Never Light a Cigarette After a Meal – Here’s Why!
Most smokers often enjoy the most when they smoke a cigarette immediately after eating, but this is very dangerous! After eating, smoking is extremely dangerous, because it can heavily damage the whole organism. 1 cigarette after a meal does the same damage as 10 cigarettes at once in any moment of the day.
The digestive system is one of the most important systems of the body, while nicotine…
