Hi,
In a strict sense, conflict resolution refers to any modification of the situation that results in an end to hostilities between two or more forces. War is a clear example, but it is rarely a long-term fix. It goes without saying that reaching an agreement is desirable, although being more challenging. If we kill our adversary, he quits fighting against us, and our battle is temporarily over. However, our adversaries are rarely alone, and friends frequently come or even change after our immediate adversary has been defeated. However, the issue is more effectively addressed when we persuade the other side to join us.
There is no requirement for agreement or competitive judgment in other forms of dispute resolution. If both my opponent and I are vying for the same prize—call let's it the one true indivisible lollipop—and either of us decides that the lollipop is disgusting and we don't want it, we may still settle our differences amicably.
When two or more parties who originally appear to be at odds have a meaningful conversation and learn that either they are not truly at odds or that the conflict they do have is different from what they first thought, they have achieved a different sort of conflict resolution.
True conflict resolution ultimately results from the straightforward recognition that everyone is inexorably connected to one another and, with a proud enough viewpoint, has similar interests. The dangers of conflict can thus be avoided without sacrificing the advantages of competitiveness. Simply said, I'm happy for you when you succeed.
Thanks