What is the difference between cooperation and compromise

How is this possible? Here is a simple example to make a very important point. Bob wants to meet at a. By compromising, they might split the difference and meet at noon. This solution, while workable, does not satisfy either person very well. Eduardo also suggests that they meet at his home in the late afternoon, since he would love to arrange a festive Mexican dinner as part of their meeting.

In addition, Bob knows the topic of the meeting is something that must be addressed sooner or later. On the other hand, a compromise refers to an agreement reached by each side making concessions. It is true that both collaboration and compromise involve two or more parties, but the manner in which the parties approach and solve the problem is different.

Hence, one could highlight that the key difference between collaboration and compromise is that while in a compromise the parties involved have to come to a middle ground, in collaboration, this is not required. This article attempts to clarify the difference between collaboration and compromise with examples. First, let us begin with the term collaboration. When faced with a particular problem, the individuals or groups approach the problem with an open mind.

This allows them to keep away their own preconceived ideas and work as a group to find the best solution to the problem. It is true that all members of a group do not have the same ways of thinking. But this works as an advantage because every individual gets an opportunity to contribute by voicing his or her perspective.

Or can we come together and make a sustainable case that science is special and should not face cuts at all? It will certainly be unhelpful if individual interest groups within science - sectors within higher education, subject disciplines, regions, professions, industry sectors - continue to run individual campaigns that are, in effect, making a case for cutting budgets for sibling sectors and seeking to pitch minister against minister.

There is also a great opportunity for the science community to build new relationships with a very different parliament that has new MPs. Many of our old pro-science friends have moved on but not all of them were scientists - Phil Willis, former chair of the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, had no formal scientific background but is a fabulous role model for other MPs to get engaged in science. The challenge for the science community is to win these new MPs over: to do that we need to tell the story of science in a collaborative way so that every MP knows why science and its applications are important to them and to their constituents.

Diana Garnham is chief executive of the Science Council, an organisation of scientific learned societies and professional institutions in the UK that furthers science and its applications. One chemistry professor received three months for producing the drug in a university lab, while another was acquitted.

Site powered by Webvision Cloud. Skip to main content Skip to navigation. No comments yet.