The Effect of the Dialogue - Essay Example

Dialogue is a way of conversation in which conflicting parties relate and converse in search of an understanding. In this discussion, the paper will focus on how the differences in the two communication patterns derail conflict resolution and how they impact conflict and what role can dialogue play in resolving such differences. Positional bargaining is a communication pattern that takes the form of negotiation involving holding to a fixed idea. It’s where the party argues for the idea for it and it alone irrespective of whether there are other underlying interests from the other party.

During the negotiation the party stands may even get harder as they defend it even more thus may often result in a lack of attention to both factions. This approach may not be the best since it is unlikely to produce a win-win outcome. Interest-based communications advocates for both parties to engage to see if they can resolve their issues by laying down what concerns them to each other and resolving them. According to Furlong (2005), there is the tendency to yield a win-win situation as both parties have the feeling that the decision making has been fair once since their input has been considered through mechanisms such as negotiations, joint problem solving, mutual bargaining and brainstorming (Furlong, 2005).

However, Deutsch, Coleman and Marcus (2011), argue observe that dialogue is the effective approach to resolution where participants in conversations and similar highly interactive communicative forms behave less like autonomous information processors and more like participants in an intrinsically cooperative activity (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2011). Dialogue allows parties to freely engage thus collaborating and actively communicating. From a dialogic perspective, communication is regarded as a joint accomplishment of the participants, who have collaborated to achieve some set of communicative goals (Deutsch et al, 2011).

One attribute which is associated with dialogue is that the opposing parties develop a mutual understanding and trust with one another. It has been advocated by many professionals including therapists to religious leaders as the best approach in conflict resolution and the results of which have been experienced in domestic disputes, peer mediation, public policy conflicts in the US and other international conflict resolutions have been achieved. For instance in schools leadership can be shared but the parties involved may fail to agree on the best way to disseminate roles.

The goal of the mediation process is always to give the students an opportunity to resolve conflicts with their peers rather than having an adult solve their conflict (Burrell, Zirbel, & Allen, 2003). The parties can engage in dialogue where they present their issues and brainstorm for the purpose of agreeing to work together for a common course; bringing good leadership to the rest of the students. Similarly in public school dialogue can be used to address violence like bullying. Instead of allocating more resources to surveillance and control, Bickmore (2010) argues that dialogue can play an important role (Bickmore, 2010).

It is a cheaper way of developing autonomy and mutual responsibility among the peers compared to the former where increased resources will be required to help identify violent acts. According to Bickmore, peer mediation programs have impressive positive effects, reducing destructive aggressive behaviour (Bickmore, 2010). Finally, some cultural differences like competitive individualism may constrain the ability of parties to enter into dialogue. This means instead of people having respect for what others have to say they instead turn the conversation to themselves to serve their own interests.

This kind of behaviour detracts collective thought, listening and hinders long term relationships. Otherwise, if people approach dialogue with the right minds and flexibility, it is bound to provide positive results which present the best resolution.