Final answer:
Yielding in conflict management generally leads to a win-lose outcome, where one party submits to the other's demands. While this resolves the conflict, it may leave one side feeling not valued. Other negotiation outcomes, such as compromise or status quo, could be more satisfactory for all parties.
Step-by-step explanation:
Yielding as a conflict management strategy usually creates a win-lose solution. This approach is often taken in scenarios where one party decides to give in to the other's demands or viewpoints to resolve a conflict or disagreement. However, it's noteworthy that while yielding might lead to a temporary resolution, it could result in the yielding party feeling dissatisfied or undervalued in the long run, as they must fully concede to the other side leaving them with a 'loss' while the other party 'wins'. In the broader context of negotiation, other outcomes like the status quo or compromise can sometimes be more satisfactory for all parties involved. When compromise is reached, it usually denotes that both parties have conceded to some extent which might not be the ideal for both but is mutually acceptable. On the other hand, the status quo remains when no agreement can be achieved during negotiations, which might benefit those who prefer the existing conditions and therefore is seen as a 'win' for them.