I’m an optimist. I think that you can solve every kind of conflict or problem between people trough communication or at least help solving it in a peaceful way. I also still believe that people are good in nature and that every “normal” or “wise” person will explore every possible peaceful option before starting threatening others and showing off with power.
Therefore I was a little disappointed to find out that several studies like that one show that communication is only good when people don’t have a threat-option. So we need to make sure that no one have a weapon or is more powerful than the other in order to have a constructive communication? But today everybody has “a weapon”, e.g. money. You’re not happy with your boss? So what would you do? Threat him that you’ll quit, then he’ll threat you that he’ll fire you first? What’s the point? Are we really so stupid, that we would always use the threat option first? Or what would you do? Do you wait with your use of threat, or do you apply it right away, when you have one?
It’s way better first to talk about the problem and search for a solution together, peacefully, like “grown-ups”. I’ve always found that expression so ridiculous. From my personal experiences I would say that children manage conflicts way better than grown-ups for just one reason. When a child have some problem with something, it says it. It says it as it is, without the sandwich-technique or considering what options does it has and if you have better “weapons”. But as it seems, “grown-ups” do the opposite – they communicate constructively only if there’s no possible destructive option. That’s just stupid, so grow up and talk with each other honestly like children, it’ll make the world a better place.