Do you agree or disagree with these 2 statements?

1. This is such an interesting topic for discussion. This is because we all have to deal with trouble or conflictual situations at times. It helps evolve and learn from past mistakes and often avoid future confusion. But I do believe some conflicts can be more chaotic than others based on the personalities of the people involved in the situation. I would say that with the fact of growing up in a house with distinctive personalities. My siblings have different ways to deal with conflicts and how to negotiate their way out of it. I like to talk and explore all possibilities to solve the problems. On the other hand, my sisters much rather avoid the issue or postpone the conversation. But they are more patient than me. So, all over the years, we had to learn and improve ways to get to the bottom of issues and avoid a bigger problem later on. My negotiation skills come from the merge of reasoning and emotions. I do prefer to value feelings and embrace emotional intelligence with summarizing the outcome, listening to all sides and getting win-win end to all parties if possible. To clarify a situation of negotiation and how to be fair, a family vacation trip in my house always involved the benefit of the trip. I can negotiate what the place offer, cost of the trip, distance and how fun it can be. It is not easy to have all people available to go. Hence, the cost of the trip is the most important part of the discussion. It has to be fair to everyone. As the article from New York Times "In Negotiations, Givers are Smarter than Takers" affirms the authors when mentioning the purpose to win-win that smart people know how to give more because they will always have more to give. In a sense of capacity to achieve more and be comfortable about giving than taking in the negotiation. Moreover, a family conflict is easier to solve since we all know each other well.

2.

Between me and my husband there is always compromising, when we do have a conflict we talk about it and see what we can do together to solve the conflict. We do have a really good communication, so our conflicts usually do not last too long.

What is compromising: Compromise-based conflict management prioritizes both the connection and the result. The intended outcome is for both parties to have some kind of satisfaction. When a deadline is drawing near and any answer is preferable than none, it is prudent to compromise.

Example of compromising: After a long day at work, Danny ordered delivery of some Chinese food. He was dismayed to learn that they had overlooked an entree when he received the order. He discovered that the kitchen was about to close when he called the restaurant to report the missing food. Instead of providing Danny's dinner right away, the Chinese restaurant chose to utilize the compromise conflict management approach and offered to give him a credit for his subsequent order. Danny concurred and made due with his resources.