Compromise Does Not Resolve Conflict. It Merely Defers It
Will you fight or compromise?
By Ishan Jagaty
Psychology Today, 8.5.2013
“Compromise does not resolve conflict. It merely defers it”
In my experience as a psychological therapist and attorney, individuals who are resistant to compromise do not need more pressure to compromise, but instead more support for their resistance. The use of compromise is a common solution to resolving disagreements in negotiation and discussion processes. While it may produce an agreement, compromise does not always resolve problems that contain underlying interpersonal or organizational conflict. This is because compromise is frequently a "settled" resolution to a problem and not typically the optimal solution sought by either party. It may generate a functional or material solution but not resolve emotional or behavioural issues associated with the disagreement. As a result one or both parties in the dispute may continue to harbour ill feelings or other dissatisfaction that can surface again if the parties continue to have contact with each other.
Many popular psychologists, such as Dr.Phil, advise that compromise is the key to resolving relationship conflict and essential to building sustainable relationships. They view compromise as a “win-win” solution where both people get some of what they want. For example, let’s say you and I are planning to meet for a cup of coffee around noon. You say you’d rather meet at 11:30am; I respond saying that 11:30am is a bit early for me given my schedule and I’d prefer noon. If you and I have no strong feelings or reasons not to compromise, we may decide on 11:45 am. Win-Win; no problem.
However, counsellors who hold this perspective tend to act more like peacemakers than counsellors, pressing people to compromise regardless of the psychological issues that fuel people’s conflicts in the first place. When people are unwilling to compromise or don’t carry out the agreement reached, counsellors are forced to treat the parties to the
By Ishan Jagaty
Psychology Today, 8.5.2013
“Compromise does not resolve conflict. It merely defers it”
In my experience as a psychological therapist and attorney, individuals who are resistant to compromise do not need more pressure to compromise, but instead more support for their resistance. The use of compromise is a common solution to resolving disagreements in negotiation and discussion processes. While it may produce an agreement, compromise does not always resolve problems that contain underlying interpersonal or organizational conflict. This is because compromise is frequently a "settled" resolution to a problem and not typically the optimal solution sought by either party. It may generate a functional or material solution but not resolve emotional or behavioural issues associated with the disagreement. As a result one or both parties in the dispute may continue to harbour ill feelings or other dissatisfaction that can surface again if the parties continue to have contact with each other.
Many popular psychologists, such as Dr.Phil, advise that compromise is the key to resolving relationship conflict and essential to building sustainable relationships. They view compromise as a “win-win” solution where both people get some of what they want. For example, let’s say you and I are planning to meet for a cup of coffee around noon. You say you’d rather meet at 11:30am; I respond saying that 11:30am is a bit early for me given my schedule and I’d prefer noon. If you and I have no strong feelings or reasons not to compromise, we may decide on 11:45 am. Win-Win; no problem.
However, counsellors who hold this perspective tend to act more like peacemakers than counsellors, pressing people to compromise regardless of the psychological issues that fuel people’s conflicts in the first place. When people are unwilling to compromise or don’t carry out the agreement reached, counsellors are forced to treat the parties to the