Agree to Disagree in Conflict Resolution: The Truth Behind It

Sometimes in attempting to resolve disputes, it comes to the point where the parties have to “agree to disagree.” We all know this locution, but what does it mean in terms of conflict resolution?

1/. Agree to disagree: Back to the basics

Simply put, “Agree to disagree” is a way to resolve a conflict in a manner whereby all parties tolerate but do not accept the opposing positions. It generally occurs when all sides recognize that further discussions would be unnecessary, inefficient, or otherwise undesirable to remain on amicable terms.

Here is an example to illustrate my point: Paul the husband, thinks that Christmas is over-commercialized and a waste of time and money. If someone gives him a gift, he is likely to give it back to the givers and tell them that he doesn’t need it. His wife, Suzanne loves all of the holiday festivities – the baking, the parties, the decorating, and the giving and receiving of gifts. Neither one is willing to change their outlook on the holiday. So, when it comes to Christmas they have agreed to disagree.

As a result, none of them will force the other to rally their views about Christmas. Paul will not accept presents and Suzanne will respect this. Paul will take part in the Christmas party although this is not something that he likes.

2/. The misinterpretation of “agree to disagree” in conflict resolution

Unfortunately, lots of people believe that everyone must agree to be able to make decisions that will solve their differences whatever they are. As a consequence, they are stuck on the “conflict path” when they are incapable to find even the slightest part of the other parties’ beliefs acceptable.

With regard, to conflict management believing that everyone must agree on everything to solve a problem is an erroneous assumption.

As shown in Paul and Suzanne's example, you can compromise - agree to disagree - without giving up your beliefs and embracing the ones of the other party(ies).

Our role as mediators is to help people understand, that contrary to what one may think, problem-solving in mediation is not about every participant being of the same mind on everything, it is about finding a solution/consensus, that everyone can live with without being frustrated and having the feeling that they gave up what they wanted with no reciprocity from the other party(s) who had everything they asked for.

To put it simply, in mediation the decision-making process is based on consensus not on unanimity. The mediators are here to help the parties find a solution where they will be able to agree to disagree in other words comprise without feeling duped.

Interestingly, even science has established that “the agree to disagree” technique we use in our mediation sessions is beneficial to people. A study conducted at Yale University shows that when two people agree on something, their brains exhibit a calm synchronicity of activity focused on sensory areas of the brain. When they disagree, however, many other regions of the brain involved in higher cognitive functions become mobilized as each individual combats the other’s argument. (cf. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience Journal January 13, 2021)

Therefore, if you or someone you know is unable to get over your difference of opinions with another person, give us a call at Mediation Path Silicon Valley and see how we can help you agree to disagree to find a win-win solution for each party involved.