Good Compomise vs. Bad Compromise
There is good compromise and bad compromise. Knowing the difference is key. Compromise has received a bad stigma, unfairly though. Compromise is a necessary tool for successful relationship.
Good compromise: deferring to someone elses' preference over yours.
Bad compromise: deferring to something that runs against your core values.
There are times where compromise is the best course of action. There are times when compromise is the worst course of action. Figure out now what your core values are. Figure out what is important and what is not. Then when faced with a decision to compromise, the decision will already be made and should be a no-brainer.
People who know how and when to compromise (and when not to) are usually successful in relationships and are often more influential friends/acquaintances/leaders.
Good compromise: deferring to someone elses' preference over yours.
Bad compromise: deferring to something that runs against your core values.
There are times where compromise is the best course of action. There are times when compromise is the worst course of action. Figure out now what your core values are. Figure out what is important and what is not. Then when faced with a decision to compromise, the decision will already be made and should be a no-brainer.
People who know how and when to compromise (and when not to) are usually successful in relationships and are often more influential friends/acquaintances/leaders.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFrom reading this response, one could be given the impression that most situations are inappropriate settings for compromise. In agreement that compromise presented as an erosive agent is not worth considering, I’ve also consider the values based alternative. Assuming that a compromise is value based, here are some views that I am inclined to offer.
ReplyDeleteReflecting on the position considered to have the lower value, what of this position having a more honest alignment to the standardized value system? Would it not be then appropriate to initiate discussion of compromise on their part, to ensure accurate alignment is created or maintained?
A difficulty for this could be that the position, assumed to have the higher value, entertains a strong legalism over their decided high values. Consequently, they may issue a form of self-imposed blinders and altogether disallow any consideration of compromise on their part.
In curious observation, it would be interesting to know if the of the individual of “higher” values, had their “higher value” system implemented while influenced by the zeal of “a cause” and thus over shot, missing in their alignment.
There's no one right but me and thee, and sometimes I wonder about thee!
ReplyDelete