Conflicting Dialogue and the Cooperative Approach

In a cooperative problem solving process, individuals or parties involved in a dispute or problem sit together, listen to each other’s points of view, identify common fears or interests, and work together to develop solutions. This approach can aptly be described as an interest-based process of solving conflicts. It is derived from the fact that disputes usually arise from opposing or clashing interests. Therefore, each party tries to protect its interest in a dispute. Consequently, the solution that is developed at the end caters for the interests of all the opposing sides. Contrary to the right-based approach where the emphasis is placed on doing the right thing in accordance with the law, the cooperative approach is based on mutual agreement by the parties involved in conflict. Evidently, parties work together or in collaboration to develop solutions. 

The main advantage of the cooperative approach in problem solving is that the mutual participation improves the long-term relationship of the parties involved in the conflict. People understand each other better, especially in relation to why they had held different perspectives. During the development of solutions, people explain themselves, adjust their positions, and compromise. It is unlikely that the same conflict will ensue after both sides have compromised and reached a consensus. Besides, each side will try to avoid clashing with each other in future after understanding their interests. Therefore, working together to develop solutions helps people to relate well with each other, hence create a peaceful coexistence. 

Creating conflict in dialogue has several advantages, especially in relation to the outcome. Firstly, having a conflict means that the parties involved do not concur; each party has a different perspective on the issue at hand. That implies that the different sides try to explain their positions, and why they think they are right. In reality, having conflict increases participation; individuals will listen keenly to their opponents to understand the genesis of their school of thought. In the process, they also understand the topic better (Johnson, Johnson, & Tjosvold, 2000). Concurrence confines individuals to a specific way of thinking but conflict exposes them to numerous novel ideas. In most situations, individuals adopt certain ways of doing things without evaluating all the possible outcomes. Settling on a specific solution sometimes is detrimental; something may collapse or fail to work. Conflict in such cases reduces the risk for errors because as parties debate, they evaluate their positions and adjust. People make mistakes all the time, thus it is crucial to subject them to some form of scrutiny. When a consensus is established, the solution that is created is better than when individuals just concur. Besides, conflict in dialogue is a form of collective effort in solving problems because ultimately, solutions are created through mutual agreement. 

Conflict in dialogue is consistent with a cooperative approach in problem solving because opposing parties are involved in creating solutions or reaching an agreement. The parties usually have divergent views, ideas, or interests. Mostly, each party believes that they have the best solutions to particular issues under discussion. However, through the argument process, each party listens to the other. The conflict is not a disagreement per se. Instead, it is a passive process where individuals sit together, listen to each other, and understand each other. Correction is usually instant when opposing sides critique each other. Also, individuals usually debate and discuss the various views as opposed to personal attacks. At the end of the discussion, the parties reason rationally and come up with the best possible solutions. Therefore, conflict in this light, becomes a cooperative approach to problem solving. 

Reference

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Tjosvold, D. (2000). Constructive controversy: The value of intellectual opposition.