With the regular scarcity of resources in our societies, disputes are an unavoidable part of life. We encounter them in organizations and many other settings. Disagreements occur when the goals, interests and priorities of parties are not in congruence. Each party has an opposing view and resources are limited. Disputes may have positive or negative outcomes. If the outcome is expected to be negative, the disagreement should be quelled using non lethal conflict resolution techniques.
Achieving a consensus between the warring parties is the most desirable outcome of an argument. This is a scenario where both parties employ empathy to understand the problem. A common agreement is achieved after investigating the problem. In a consensus, both parties voluntarily choose to end the disagreement. This method is desirable since personal relationships are built over potentially hazardous ground.
In some arguments, forcing the interests and needs of one party over those of the opposing party may put a stop to the bickering. This technique of dispute settlement is known as competition. The root causes of your problem are not explored. As such, this kind of a disagreement is likely to resurface later in the future. This method may be used as a final resort when other techniques have failed.
The term compromise refers to a strategy that seeks to identify a practical solution to a disagreement by finding their common ground. By compromising, both parties give up some of their demands in order to arrive at the solution. This tactic does not face the underlying causes of a disagreement. Since the opponents lose some of the subject matter, they may later become disgruntled. This method is useful for moderately important objectives where direct coercion cannot be used.
When you realize that the need or priorities of another party are superior to yours, it is better to accommodate their point of view for the overall good. Accommodation is a strategy that works well in the high levels of organization where the company vision and objectives are clear. It may also be used to buy time to prepare for a better argument. As the adage goes, it is better to live to fight another day.
If the issue causing disputes is not very important to you, withdrawal is a good option. In this approach of dispute settlement, one party simply gives up their interests and steps aside. This is a good alternative when the issue is trivial and there are other pressing matters. However, avoiding significant issues may breed trouble for the entire organization as a whole.
In some cases, management may give out an authoritative command on how to handle the dispute. The executives may issue a command without explaining their position or reasons to any party. This method saves time and shows who is in control.
One of the most integral parts of solving and preventing a disagreement is effective communication. It is important that the opposing sides recognize the value of the subject matter. Empathy is also an important virtue during dispute settlement. Knowledge of non lethal conflict resolution methods is useful both in business and social relationships.
Achieving a consensus between the warring parties is the most desirable outcome of an argument. This is a scenario where both parties employ empathy to understand the problem. A common agreement is achieved after investigating the problem. In a consensus, both parties voluntarily choose to end the disagreement. This method is desirable since personal relationships are built over potentially hazardous ground.
In some arguments, forcing the interests and needs of one party over those of the opposing party may put a stop to the bickering. This technique of dispute settlement is known as competition. The root causes of your problem are not explored. As such, this kind of a disagreement is likely to resurface later in the future. This method may be used as a final resort when other techniques have failed.
The term compromise refers to a strategy that seeks to identify a practical solution to a disagreement by finding their common ground. By compromising, both parties give up some of their demands in order to arrive at the solution. This tactic does not face the underlying causes of a disagreement. Since the opponents lose some of the subject matter, they may later become disgruntled. This method is useful for moderately important objectives where direct coercion cannot be used.
When you realize that the need or priorities of another party are superior to yours, it is better to accommodate their point of view for the overall good. Accommodation is a strategy that works well in the high levels of organization where the company vision and objectives are clear. It may also be used to buy time to prepare for a better argument. As the adage goes, it is better to live to fight another day.
If the issue causing disputes is not very important to you, withdrawal is a good option. In this approach of dispute settlement, one party simply gives up their interests and steps aside. This is a good alternative when the issue is trivial and there are other pressing matters. However, avoiding significant issues may breed trouble for the entire organization as a whole.
In some cases, management may give out an authoritative command on how to handle the dispute. The executives may issue a command without explaining their position or reasons to any party. This method saves time and shows who is in control.
One of the most integral parts of solving and preventing a disagreement is effective communication. It is important that the opposing sides recognize the value of the subject matter. Empathy is also an important virtue during dispute settlement. Knowledge of non lethal conflict resolution methods is useful both in business and social relationships.
About the Author:
You can visit the website www.optimisticanalyst.com for more helpful information about The Best Methods Of Non Lethal Conflict Resolution
No comments:
Post a Comment