Lemanskills.com

Search
Close this search box.

Team Conflict: Is It Always a Bad Thing?

When we hear “conflict”, we think “trouble”. When we hear “conflict”, we think “dysfunctional team”, where communication doesn’t work, and people have personal issues. Or when we hear “conflict”, we think that leader doesn’t know how to lead his/her team successfully.

Is that really true? Why are we so scared of a conflict? What is the worst thing that can happen when there is a conflict in the team? What kind of experiences we have with the conflict that make us think and behave in a certain way when one appears?

Why do we avoid conflict?

The real question should be: why do we avoid doing things in overall?

  • We have bad experiences from the past. We wanted to share a great idea with somebody, and as a response we got yelling and then being ghosted for a week. We gave feedback, with a good intention so a person can grow, and as a response we got attack and aggression. Based on that kind of experiences we decide (sometimes on the unconscious level) that we are not going to expose ourselves to those reactions. So, we just stop doing it, since it brought us more harm than good in the past.
  • Other people think that we should stay low. How many times did you hear: “stay low, don’t put yourself out there” or “maybe it’s not perfect, but at least you have a peace and quiet of mind”. Or “you should be happy about what you have, don’t risk it”. Speaking up requires putting ourselves in the spotlight and even when we just want to share another point of view, or we want to improve a way of working, there is always a risk of being somehow judged or attacked by people. If others are afraid of that kind of courage of speaking up, they will project this fear on us: just to make sure that nobody gets hurt (twisted logic). And if we trust those people, it’s a huge chance that we will listen to them and resign from making a change.
  • We have our own beliefs about something. What do you think about conflict: is it a good or a bad thing? Or maybe it depends? If we were exposed (as children and then, as adults) to the conversations where other people were discussing that a conflict is the worst thing that can happen and we should avoid it because it never brings anything good, how on Earth can we be open to it? It’s almost impossible, since our brain is soaked with this narrative and doesn’t have any other data that it can rely on to create a new belief. It’s applicable to every single thing that we avoid: we don’t do it, because our brain “protects” us from being hurt by potential consequences of that kind of decision.

In the area of conflicts, it’s extremely visible: we avoid it, because we burned ourselves once or twice. Based on that we make this strategy to not get involved in any kind of “risky” situation: so, we sit quiet and just focus on living through another day. Is it really the best option we can get?

When a lack of conflict is dysfunctional, not the other way around?

One of the biggest experts of team development and leadership, Patrick Lencioni, years ago wrote a book “5 Disfunctions of a Team”. It is a really short story (doesn’t even look like a personal/professional development book), yet it’s very powerful. And there is one part that stopped me when I first read it: Lencioni says that one of the dysfunctions of a team is a fear of conflict.

What?

(On the chart on the left-hand side there are definitions of all disfunctions and on the right-hand side there are solutions, that answer the questions: what is the best thing we can do here for our teams?)

If we stick to our old believe that a conflict is something negative and destructive – that it ruins the trust and good atmosphere in the team, how is it possible that it’s actually the other way around?

When we avoid conflict, not speaking up and be open about what do we really think, feel, or observe in the workplace, there is a huge risk of not being as effective and efficient as possible. It’s also short sided: if we are not sharing it now, it’s going to backfire in the future. So, at the end of the day, it will bring worse result than we imagine now. What’s even worse, people probably will talk behind other colleagues’ or leader’s backs, and not saying anything out loud. We can imagine that it will bring even worse outcomes, like really ruining the atmosphere, creating space for psychological games and in a consequence: lack of trust.

The fear of conflict can be one of the biggest barriers that will stop people from growth, thrive and being the best versions of themselves in a workplace. What can we do to change this mindset?

How can we use conflict that nourishes our team?

The key thing to understand is that a certain kind conflict is something that we can use. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t, it really depends on what we are dealing with.

There are 2 categories of conflicts, I call them functional and dysfunctional.

  • Functional conflicts are when there is a space for people to have a discussion, create a new product, service or idea that can be reshaped in something groundbreaking. It happens when two (or more) people are really passionate about what they do, and they want to create the biggest possible value for others. If you are a manager, you can use this occasion to create a safe environment, where people can discuss with a minimized risk of having a destructive argument. That way you make sure that they have a contract for this discussion, good intention of creating something, not to be mean to each other (or prove the other person that their point of view is worse or not worth anything at all). Be a moderator, guard of the conversation, support when needed and make sure that the conversation nourishes both sides.
  • Dysfunctional conflicts are when they fit into one of the types on the Wheel of Conflict (created by Christopher Moore).

  • Conflict of data is when we miss some pieces of information. It’s like having an Excel spreadsheet where there are blanks in some cells and in consequence formulas don’t work. It can also happen when two people understand one thing in a different way (have different frame of reference).
  • Conflict of structure is when there is a lack of clear scope of responsibilities between people/teams, the processes or policies are not working (or they don’t exist at all). It can also happen when there is a lack of contract (we don’t know who is responsible for what, when and why).
  • Conflict of interest is when one side has their own goals that are contradictory to those that the other side has. A great example is a salesperson and a service person: the first one’s goal is to sale as much as possible, and the second person is responsible for the best quality of service, while taking care of the same customer. The first one has bonus from each customer, and the other has a bonus from not-returning-with-questions clients. Completely different focus.
  • Conflict of values is when we have religious or political differences, that are influencing our ways of living or are a base of what is important and not-negotiable for us. This type of conflict is not solvable, we can only agree to not bring those subjects to the conversation or mediate when it influences our workspace somehow.
  • Conflict of relations is at the end of the cycle. The interesting thing is when we think about conflicts, the first thing that comes to our mind is “people are not communicating well” or “they don’t like each other” – we don’t dig deeper into first four types of conflict. The truth is that conflict of relations is at the very end, mostly as consequence of one (or more) of the previous ones. It’s happening when we communicate badly, we use stereotypes in our way of thinking, can’t deal with strong emotions that we experience, or we repeat other negative behaviors.

What can we do with the dysfunctional conflicts? First and foremost: we need to map and name correctly which conflict is the real one in the situation we are dealing with. Without that, even the most beautiful strategy is not going to work, because we are going to answer to the wrong need. We’ll get frustrated and use all our energy badly. Focus on investigating will bring the best results, since then the solutions will be to the point: it’s more than certain that it’s worth investing time in this process.

The bottom line

The conflict is a huge, hairy, and scary thing that we often have very strong convictions about. We avoid it, by staying low, don’t speak up to not get into any confrontation. We do it because we don’t want to get hurt, expose ourselves to bad emotions, stress or feeling that we do not belong. Perfectly natural, there is nothing to be ashamed of.

When we make a mindset shift: from fixed (focused on avoiding conflict) to a growth one, where we take into consideration that the conflict can be good for us, nourishing and interesting, we can gain more than we think. With remembering about having a good intention, being in OK-OK zone and with a goal of creating something extraordinary as a consequence of a passionate discussion, we can achieve the outcome that won’t be possible to achieve on our own.

It puts old, good conflict in a completely new light. I believe it’s worth trying if it fits.

Udostępnij

Komentarze

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
0 komentarzy
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Czytaj także

Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Promoter

Can you recall any situation when a person went straight into doing things, sometimes without more in-depth analysis? Maybe too risky in your head? Or maybe it’s a person who is always in the movement, never sits in one place, and you feel like they live 3 lives in 1? That’s The Promoter. The third of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve already covered two of them: Persister and Thinker. Today we go into the next one, filling out the gaps in knowledge so it all makes sense after we cover everything. We’ll have the base on we can stand to start acting on it: not only KNOW from the rational perspective what we should do. Doing and practice: that’s what is the most important for the Promoter in the PCM personality Base. Let’s go into this world today to check what is the whole fuss about. How do we recognize Promoter? Promoter is a person who experience the world through the lens of doing things, acting on them, movement. Their perception is action itself, since they use their delivery part of themselves the most frequently. They always look for excitement and change in what is happening in their life, when they get a task, project or want to decide on something. The things around them need to be different, challenging, new. They don’t want to wait: they want to experience the world here and now. How to recognize a Promoter in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Promoter it will be: “Let’s go!”, “Let’s do things!?”, “Why to wait: let’s go and do it now!”, “doing…”, “walking the walk…”, “no more talking, let’s do things”. They say all of that because for them what’s important is seeing the results of their actions. They hate to wait, overanalyze, focusing on too many details. What’s important for them is to go, do things, see what happens and calibrate if needed. The recognition of Promoter is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time they have the furrows between the eyebrows (lion’s wrinkle), their voice is rather strong, they talk fast since they don’t want to waste time. Moderate gestures and body language, rather adjusted to the aim they have to achieve. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Promoter in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person? What does Promoter need in communication?   The Promoter needs communication process where they have a chance to go straight to the action. Extremely important for them as well is to know what to do, have space to do it and act as soon as possible. To be efficient in communication with Promoter, we need to use directive channel of communication (quite different than we had in Persister’s and Thinker’s story). Directive channel means that we create a sentence with a dot at the end of it. Promoter doesn’t want to waste time, so asking them questions or small talk is a nonsense, will never work. That means that we need to directly tell them whats’ there to be done. Using the same example that we got in the Persister’s and Thinker’s case: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be just telling them about it. “Please go and do a task X, the deadline for it is Y”. Honestly: it’s all they need, nothing fancy. They value Autocratic interaction style. It means that they are the most efficient when the other person just tells them what is there to be done and leave them alone, so they can go and focus on the delivery. Straight to the point, sometimes (especially for the people that are not so big fans of a directive communication channel” might look a little harsh or cold. But for them, it’s perfect. Promoter seek to answer the existential question: am I alive? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Promoter is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth. I’m alive = I can deliver value to the world Motivational needs attached to this PCM type is It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Promoter goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Excitement means that Promoter needs to have stimuli, things to do, new projects, environment, tasks to cover. This need can be covered equally good in private as in professional life. But the important thing is that boredom, monotonous tasks or circumstances is the worst thing that can happen to Promoter. When do we know that Promoter is in distress? Just a reminder: distress is negative stress, that costs us (and our environment) something. We are in distress when our motivational needs are frustrated and to cover them (in a really bizarre way), we into the distress sequence. How does is look like for a Promoter? Driver: you need to be strong for me (meaning: you are OK only if you are strong). On this level, Promoter will expect that people will suck it up, that they do everything on their own, without asking for help (which is weakness). When we see that kind of behavior, we can offer more excitement, changing the environment (going for the walk is sometimes enough), give a new task (even if it’s super small and might look stupid). Blamer Mask. Promoter wears a blamer mask on the second level of distress. It their case it means that they start to manipulate others, set up arguments, sometimes create negative drama. Everything to cover their need of excitement since they are bored. And drama is better than boredom. Cellar: At the

Czytaj dalej
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Thinker

Do you have around yourself people that speak data and facts? That connects the dots all the time, since things need to make sense for them? That kind of people that are concrete, to the point and doesn’t what to waste time on meaningless discussions and rather focus on things that matter? That’s the Thinker. The second out of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE and then we’ve described Persister, as the first stop on our journey to know them all better. Why is it important to characterize all of them? Because thanks to that you’ll know the whole spectrum of the types, so when you talk to somebody, you can make a strong hypothesis about their personality Base to tailor your communication. And because we communicate with others all the time, it’s crucial to have the maximum number of useful tools and practices so we don’t waste time on insufficient communication. At least that’s what the Thinker will say haha.   How do we recognize Thinker?   Thinker is a person who experience the world through the lens of data, facts and logic. Their perception is thoughts since they use their rational part of themselves the most frequently. They always look for logic in what is happening in their life, when they get a task, project or want to decide on something. The things around them need to have structure, and they want a lot of things to make a structure around them as well. So, things have their own place, they plan their time: privately and professionally. How to recognize a Thinker in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Thinker it will be: “I think…”, “The data says…”, “The logic says…”, “The logical choice will be…”, “The most accurate solution in this case is…”, “The chart shows that…”, “The data in the report give us…”. They say all of that because for them what’s rational and backed up with data, is valuable. If something has some gaps, there is not enough information, numbers or facts, the Thinker won’t do it. They will look for more evidence, gather more knowledge, examples or cases and then, when they have it all, they are comfortable with making a former decision. The recognition of Thinker is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time their face is “flat”, there’s not a lot of mimics on it. Their voice is rather monotonous, stable, as well as their body. They don’t overspend the energy on moving their bodies or use unnecessary gestures. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Thinker in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person?   What does Thinker need in communication?   The Thinker needs communication process where they have a chance to express their thoughts. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can think, connect the dots, create logical solutions to the problems that occur. To be efficient in communication with Thinker, we need to use requestive channel of communication (as we did with the Persister). The difference is that we ask Persister “what do you believe…” and we ask Thinker “what do you think…”. That means that we need to ask questions about their thoughts on a certain subject. Using the same example that we got in the Persister’s case: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be telling them about it and then ask about their thoughts on it. “Okay, here is a task X… What do you think we need to do to complete it efficiently?” Asking that kind of question is something that we can do to get in contact with the Thinker. Once they are on board, we can talk about the details (scope, deadline, support, required learning etc.). They value Democratic interaction style. It means that they are good in exchanging thoughts, ideas, solutions. They want to be asked on what they think. They like discussions, brainstorming sessions, but only when they are concrete and not too long. One of the worst things that we can do while getting in contact with Thinker is to use directive communication channel, but they also don’t really like the emotive (too much energy) and comforting (they don’t need all those emotions). But especially telling them what to do without even asking is something that they hate. When they have an autocratic person on the other side of the conversation, they go into aggressive behaviors. By being in that zone there is a huge possibility that they’re going to attack other people. So democratic interaction style and requestive communication channel is a key to success in getting on the same page with that person. Thinker seek to answer the existential question: am I competent? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Thinker is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth.   I’m competent = I’m valuable as a person   Motivational needs attached to this PCM type are recognition of efficient work and time structure. It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Thinker goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Recognition of efficient work means that we are seen as people for what we deliver at work and this delivery is with an exact (or better) outcome that we agreed on. Time structure means that we need to put things in order: when we plan our day, and something comes up, we don’t take it easily (especially then the thing that came up is an additional task that we get, outside

Czytaj dalej
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Persister

Do you know at least one person that always has an opinion on a given subject? That has a strong set of values and that is the base of most of the decisions that they make? The person that is trustworthy: when they say that something is going to be done, it will, 100%? That’s Persister. First out of six personality types in Process Communication Model (PCM), the concept created by Taibi Kahleb. You can read shortly about the concept HERE, to have a basic structure around what PCM is really about. Today, I would love for us to have a description of who the Persister is, how we recognize this type is in the other person’s Base. Meaning that it is their first floor of personality structure, where they have most of the resources, competencies, and skills. The Base also stands for what is the most natural way of communication for the other person and through what kind of lenses they observe the world. So today we are going to discover who the Persister is, how to navigate when this person is in front of us and what to do to communicate effectively. How do we recognize Persister? Persister is a person who evaluates the world around them by comparing it to their values and beliefs. Their perception is opinions, and a lot of situations with Persisters relate to comparing one thing to another. How they feel, how they think and how they operate daily against the law, rules, policies, ways of working. While being around people, they’re loyal, and they value trust. They always keep promises: for a Persister it is impossible to even think about not keeping the word. If they say they do something, they are going to do it, no matter what. So, we don’t need to ask them several times a question like: “Are you going to go to do it? What is the progress of it?” because they’ll always do it (in fact, that kind of questions drive Persister crazy). How to recognize this person if that we don’t have their personality structure yet? You can listen to the words they need. For Persister it will be: “I believe…”, “in my opinion…”, “we should do something” or …shouldn’t do something”, “I trust…”, “the important thing for me is…”, “the crucial thing is…”. They say those words because they see the world through the lenses of opinions and values: that’s how Persister is the most visible. Of course, we are talking about being in OK-OK zone. It’s about having an opinion, but also always having a good intention. It’s not about pushing the opinion no matter what or aiming to hurt others. They have an opinion on every single subject and even if they don’t (i.e., they’re not interested in something), they have an opinion on it. Like: “Ok, so I’m not into politics because it really doesn’t interest me: I don’t want to waste my time on that subject”. Based on that example, we can see that there is always an opinion, even if at the first sight there’s none. What is also important that Persister doesn’t have any problem with saying those opinions out loud. And it’s not about being rude: it’s about being persistent, having a voice that matters (in professional and/or private life). Of course, HOW the opinion is communicated is important (it needs to be said from the OK-OK perspective). If it’s not – it’s another part of the story. What do Persister need in communication? I’m trustworthy = I’m valuable as a person When do we know that Persister is in distress? What does to be in distress mean? Being a distress means that we don’t have our motivational needs covered and we go into a sequence that is aligned with certain PCM type. So, if you have a Persister on the other side of the communication process and their needs are frustrated, they go into distress, you will see 3 steps of the sequence. Being in distress means that we don’t think clearly. When it happens, we don’t have access to our skillset, abilities to deal with different (especially stressful and difficult) situations, we can’t act accordingly (even if we rationally know how to do it). That’s why it’s so important firstly to come back to OK-OK, to our Base, and then – once we are there, go and deal with the situation. That kind of approach is always going to work, regardless of the PCM type. It’s worth to remember the sequence, since it is repetitive. By training ourselves in recognizing patterns we train our muscle of reacting accordingly, without going into distress ourselves. The mask invites the mask: meaning that behavior under distress will have influence on us, and even if we are in OK-OK zone, we can go into the dark side. Being aware of what’s happening gives us tools to protect ourselves and support others in getting into better place. The bottom line Persister is a great person to cooperate with. When they say that they’ll do something, we can be sure that will happen, no matter what. We don’t even need to doublecheck: for Persisters it’s impossible to not deliver the things that we agreed on, it’s in their DNA to do it. Their strong principles, values, and a high-level need to be trustworthy make them great partners in crime. Of course, while being in distress, they lose access to those resources and go into not so shiny place. It requires more awareness, being mindful what happens with us (if we are Persisters in Base), and other people (when Persister is on the other side of communication process).    So, I invite us all to observe those behaviors described in the article starting today. It can help us more than we think, regardless of the type of relation, context, or situation that we are in. It’s always worth to develop in this area. PS. As a first exercise after reading this article,

Czytaj dalej
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x