Brazilian agreements include implicit flexibility as a fundamental feature, not an exception or failure mode. Commitments are real, but they exist within circumstances that may change. When circumstances change significantly, adjustment is expected rather than rigid enforcement of original terms.
This flexibility is not lack of commitment—it is a different form of commitment: commitment to work together toward mutually beneficial outcomes rather than to execute specified terms regardless of changed reality. If circumstances make the original agreement problematic, the mature response is renegotiation, not insistence. This flexibility operates through communication; if you cannot meet a commitment, communicate early, explain circumstances, and propose adjustments. Silence followed by failure is much worse than proactive renegotiation. The flexibility has limits—it requires good faith and will not be extended to those who abuse it—but within relationship and good faith, adjustment is expected and reasonable.
Comments