Compromise is considered a rational option for balancing opposing interests. Psychology gives the following definition of what compromise is: a choice of strategy in a confrontation in which opponents need to make some concessions in relation to satisfying the interests, aspirations, and desires of the opposing side. Compromise is based, first of all, on respect for opposing positions. It always follows a conflict of interests, opposition of multidirectional desires, confrontation of needs. As a rule, such confrontation arises between people, but it can also be observed within individuals, between states, and religions.
What is compromise?
A compromise is an agreement between parties who have differences, concluded on the basis of mutual concessions to each other, and often such a solution benefits all parties to the conflict. The basis of compromise is the desire to resolve accumulated differences by giving up each side, at least temporarily, from its own ambitions in favor of the opposite side.
Thus, the foundation of a compromise is always a concession in favor of another person (a group of people, a state, etc.), implying a voluntary retreat of an individual from his own positions and interests. At the same time, a concession made by one party must cause a similar action by the other party , which is no less obliged to sacrifice part of its interests in favor of the opponent.
The described method of dispute resolution is widely used not only in the field of social interaction, but also in the field of politics. Throughout human history, one can find many examples of mutually beneficial compromises that successfully ended seemingly insoluble disputes between countries. Therefore, compromise, concluded in an atmosphere of mutual respect, is one of the most effective ways to resolve conflicts. It allows you to take into account and respect the interests of all parties to the dispute, making a decision that suits them based on mutual concessions.
Examples of compromises
Let's look at a few examples of compromises that we periodically encounter in life.
1. Husband and wife
Disagreements often arise between husband and wife regarding the family budget - what should it be, joint or separate? For example, a wife wants a completely joint budget, and a husband wants a completely separate one, citing the fact that they earn the same amount. It would seem that the situation is insoluble.
However, husband and wife know how to negotiate, each of them makes concessions, and they conclude a compromise - each month puts 50% of their salary into the general budget (mortgage, utilities, food are paid from it), and each leaves the remaining 50% for personal needs. This is a fair compromise.
2. Parents and children
What is more important: finding a job and starting to earn money, or getting a quality education? Parents believe that they need to complete all 5 university courses without being distracted by work, and their son, being in his 2nd year, already wants to transfer to a correspondence course and go to work, because... he does not have enough money for personal needs.
Of course, it’s up to the son to decide, because he’s already an adult. But he respects the opinion of his parents and finds a compromise solution - he remains a full-time student, and gets a job not full-time , as he wanted, but part-time with a schedule that does not interfere with his studies. His parents, in turn, give him the use of their car to quickly move between work and study. Each side made certain concessions, and as a result a compromise was reached.
Types of behavior strategies in conflicts
The issue is studied by the sciences of social science and the discipline of conflictology. There are more than 100 meanings of the term “conflict”, some of them contradict each other. In general, we can say that conflict is an expression of discontent and contradictions that arise as a result of a difference of opinion.
Today, one of the most famous and widely used in conflict resolution is the work of Thomas-Killman. According to the concept, there are the following strategies for behavior in conflict:
- rivalry;
- compromise;
- device;
- cooperation;
- evasion.
Rivalry
Rivalry is an attempt to impose your point of view and desired result on the opposite side. Personal interests come first, without taking into account the opinions of the opponent. This manner of behavior can only be used by people who have some power and advantage.
Note! According to the results of the Kenneth Thomas test, in more than 65% of cases people choose the principle of competition, and not always consciously.
Compromise
Compromise is behavior in conflict that involves resolving the dispute. Those in conflict are ready to partially renounce their beliefs in order to make a decision that equally satisfies both parties. By using this method, everyone loses something. The strategy makes sense when opponents have a common goal, the result of which is not divided in half, for example, the desire of 2 buyers to pick up the last product.
Found a compromise
Device
Accommodation is behavior in conflict that involves working together to solve a problem. Each puts his personal interests above the interests of his opponent, but one of the parties temporarily agrees with the opponent’s point of view in order to later receive concessions from him. Psychologists say that accommodation is often the main way to resolve disputes.
Cooperation
Cooperation is behavior in conflict where both parties find a joint solution that transforms enemies into partners. The main characteristic of cooperation is that the search for solutions must always satisfy both. This strategy can be used as an example of behavior with business partners.
Important! The cause of the conflict determines how appropriate it is to use a cooperative strategy. If the result is vital for one of the parties involved in the conflict, cooperation is impossible. Any attempts at interaction will develop into struggle or rivalry.
Evasion
Often the strategy is used when the conflict does not affect the interests of one or more parties. There are situations when they try to involve a third party in a dispute between two people, then avoidance can illustrate the person’s reluctance to enter into conflict.
Other Behavior Styles
In addition to the 5 common Thomas-Killman strategies, in psychology there are 2 more options for the development of events:
- Suppression. It is permissible to use when the situation becomes aggressive and threatens human life or health. Suppression may be initiated by one of the parties or come from a third party. For example, when students argue in class, the third party is the teacher who suppresses the conflict;
- Negotiation. They can take different forms: from family to state. The main function of negotiations is to reduce aggression and approach the problem rationally. All parties agree on further actions on mutually beneficial terms. As a result of negotiations, a transition to strategies of cooperation or compromise is possible.
At the negotiating table
Types of compromise
Compromises are divided into two types: positive and forced (negative).
A positive compromise means an agreement, the need to conclude which (and with it, the obligation of mutual concessions) was recognized, understood and accepted by both parties to the dispute. In such a situation, the parties can easily find a mutually beneficial way out of a deadlocked dispute.
A forced (or negative) compromise is an agreement, the conclusion of which was clearly and obviously disadvantageous to one of the parties to the dispute, however, due to certain circumstances, such a compromise had to be made. Examples of such compromises are often found in the labor sphere, where the employee is dependent on the employer and is obviously at a disadvantage, as they say, “not in a position to bargain.” But even within the framework of such an agreement, there must be at least some benefit for the employee, otherwise it can no longer be called a compromise.
Behavior in conflict at work
How to overcome fear and phobias yourself - ways to fight
Behavior in a situation that arises in the workplace directly depends on status and position. If superiors can command and suppress, for subordinates the chosen strategy may result in a reprimand or dismissal.
If disagreements in the workplace escalate into conflict, you need to take control of your emotions. The first thing to do is to evade, try not to get into arguments. The opponent can use provocations, the main thing is not to lose control of himself.
Man meditating
What to do if control over emotions is lost? As a reminder, you need to learn the rules of behavior in a conflict situation:
- Do not raise your voice at your opponent, even in response;
- Try to determine for yourself the cause of the conflict, the positions and goals of both parties;
- If there is no clear goal, the interlocutor tries to insult for no reason, the best option is to ignore the attacks;
- If there is a reason why a conflict broke out, it is necessary to seek a compromise. As a last resort, adapt and make concessions, especially for newcomers to the team;
- If a person feels that he is not ready to argue and prove his opinion, he should try to postpone the conversation.
Important! The main goal of the manipulator is to cause anger and negativity in order to realize himself at the expense of other people’s emotions. You can’t delve into what you hear, you need to let the information pass you by.
Advantages and disadvantages of compromise
The obvious advantages of mutually beneficial agreements concluded by the two parties include:
- maintaining good relations between opponents after a successful resolution of a controversial situation;
- the parties gain additional experience in the field of negotiations, acquire skills and abilities to successfully resolve conflicts;
- minimizing possible risks, and, as a result, the impossibility of further aggravation of the situation;
- the opportunity to finally resolve a long-simmering conflict and never return to it;
- the benefit received by both parties to a dispute as a result of its successful resolution.
However, concluding a compromise is also fraught with some negative consequences. The disadvantages of such an agreement include several circumstances:
- finding a compromise is a difficult and often lengthy task, requiring the parties to have at least minimal respect for each other and the ability to negotiate;
- often a compromise does not resolve the dispute, but only delays its final resolution;
- Sometimes, in order to reach an agreement, one or both parties to the conflict have to go against their own principles, pride and ambitions.
Is it possible to avoid conflict?
It is not always possible to control your behavior in a serious conflict; this skill needs to be learned. Among those arguing, there must be at least 1 person who will try to avoid conflict. How to do it:
- Do not rush. Before expressing your opinion, you need to ask yourself questions: “Why are we arguing? Do I need this? What will I lose if I give in?”;
- Answer slowly and briefly. The faster a person speaks, the more likely he is to say too much. Measured speech will calm the opponent, after which you can try to find a compromise;
- Do not provoke with unnecessary phrases or inappropriate jokes. There is no need to touch a person if he is not in a good mood. It is better to set aside time after the lunch break to communicate with colleagues; communication can be tense in the first half of the day;
- To avoid conflict at work, you need to monitor your correspondence. Modern people often use messengers and social networks. You cannot write unnecessary things, show emotions, they can later be used by provocateurs;
- Limit communication with the provocateur. If a person provokes conflicts, you need to reduce communication with him to a minimum, do not cross paths after work or study, and do not be in public places in the same company.
A girl calms two people down
What strategy to use in a conflict is a personal decision for everyone. Depending on his position in society, point of view and ultimate goal, the person himself chooses the path of competition or seeks a compromise. If possible, it is better to avoid conflict situations, especially if they arise between close people.
Differences between compromise and consensus
Both consensus and compromise are ways to resolve disputes, however, both methods differ markedly from each other. Thus, a compromise implies obligatory mutual concessions of the parties , while consensus does not imply the presence of such a condition.
Consensus is a specific, pre-prepared template that allows one to successfully resolve a conflict situation, while concessions, which are not always beneficial to oneself, in this case can only come from one of the conflicting parties.
Rules for successful compromise
Experts identify two rules, following which helps conflicting parties reach a compromise solution:
- When discussing a way out of the current situation, each side must not only listen, but also delve into the essence of the opponent’s arguments. It is in principle impossible to find a solution that suits everyone without understanding the opposite side.
- Both parties to the dispute should strive to achieve a mutually beneficial solution that suits both of them, made on the basis of respect for the opponent and his demands. The essence of a compromise lies in voluntary concessions on both sides; otherwise, the decision made will only delay the further development of the conflict, but will not extinguish it.
Device
The exact opposite of the competitive strategy, which is characterized by unconditional acceptance of the position of the conflicter. A person puts his needs and desires into the background in order to avoid a conflict situation. This is usually done by people with low self-esteem and who do not know how to defend their position. They are characterized by the following actions: agreement with the demands of the conflicter, absence of complaints and expression of flattery. This tactic may be applicable in cases where the subject of the conflict is not of particular importance to you and you want to maintain a constructive relationship.
Take online courses for free and discover new opportunities Start studying
conclusions
As is clear from the above, the undoubted advantage of a compromise is its relative “painlessness” in relation to both opposing sides. In fact, it is impossible to find a situation in which the search for a compromise solution would be impossible, because this method of resolving disputes is successfully used both in resolving family and interpersonal disagreements, and in resolving serious interstate conflicts. But this method is effective only with mutual concessions of the parties, and therefore the search for a compromise requires tact, patience and endurance.
Cooperation
The subject of the conflict seeks to resolve the situation in such a way as to fully satisfy his needs and the opponent. That is, find a solution that will benefit everyone. Such tactics tend to analyze the subject of the conflict, calculate the resources of the participants in order to find a common benefit, and carefully listen to the position of the interlocutor. This strategy has practically the same advantages - it promotes the development of trust and long-term interpersonal relationships, and the adoption of mutually beneficial decisions. But not in all conflicts it is possible to fully satisfy the basic desires of each participant, in which case the principle of cooperation will only complicate the situation.
