Compromise is Highly Overrated  Webster’s says that compromise “is a settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.” It also says that compromise is a concession to something detrimental, i.e., The airplane’s fuselage is compromised; failed.

The premise of diplomacy is that if all sides make concessions to resolve differences, conflicts are avoided and peace maintained. But in many instances compromise only acts to postpone conflicts, not resolve them. So, compromise is more about dilution and delusion than inclusion or resolution.

The founding fathers compromised the abolition of slavery in our Constitution because the southern states would not have signed if people as property were forbidden. The idea and ideals of free people living and working in a country guided by fairness was compromised. The costs of that compromise was the credibility of equality as a concept and us a country.

The founders deluded themselves into thinking they could fix these wrongs later, without serious or lasting consequences. Only after a hundred years and a civil war where more Americans died than in all of this country’s other wars combined did the wrongs of slavery get “corrected.” This compromised decision and subsequent correction created a schism in our culture that still exists today.

Now, expediency and inclusion are the key motivators of compromise. Concessions are made to gain collective agreement or buy-in. Compromise has become the solution to conflict, but not the answer.

Instead of a frank discussion of issues where goals are identified and articulated, compromise is applied as an ointment to reduce conflict and soothe hurt feelings. Resolution of conflict is important, but not at the cost of integrity or performance. By confirming and affirming objectives, shared goals can be accomplished. Successful enterprises of all kinds can prosper because the compromises they accept do not change their course or alter their culture. When people understand and accept a shared vision of what needs to be accomplished, compromise becomes more about context than content.

Resistance in the face of compromise is not stubbornness but tenacity. Yes, change when circumstances change, but not for ephemeral reasons. Holding steadfast to your vision of what you want to accomplish is the only way to attain and sustain success.

Guided by our process of Design by Objectives™, Essex Two helps its clients examine what is important to them and why it is also important to their customers. We recognize and appreciate the value of compromise when the values of the organization’s long-term goals and objectives are not sacrificed. Visit the Essex Two website for case studies that demonstrate our ability to serve the success of our clients.

Worth your time: Unstuck is a quick, interesting read for anyone who wants to motivate themselves or their team through a difficult time, task or transition. Written by Keith Yamashita and Sandra Spataro, Unstuck is full of diagrams and tools that help a reader not only to understand the process but to implement it as well.