Articles
5 essential steps to resolve a conflict at work
5 essential steps to resolve a conflict at work - Alexander Kjerulf
July 31, 2006 @ 11:52 am Filed under Happy At Work, Best of site
Though Jane enjoyed working as the sales manager of Wilbey & Sons, working with
Scott, the financial manager, was a constant struggle for her. At every meeting,
Scott would take great care to explain why all her ideas were unworkable. Also,
Scott was constantly asking for sales projections and financial data from her
and always wanted it in excruciating detail. Supplying these figures was taking
up a large amount of her department's already packed schedule. Frankly she thought,
he was nothing but a dry, negative perfectionist.
Scott, on the other hand, thought that Jane was a maverick. She always had to
interrup meetings with her harebrained schemes and whenever he asked her for
the data he needed to keep the company finances in order, she would always stall
and make him have to ask her again several times. Jane, he felt, was nothing
but a happy-go-lucky, unrealistic show-off.
It got to the point where neither of them could stand to be in the same room
together. The company clearly suffered under this conflict between two of its
key employees and something clearly needed to be done. Fortunately the CEO had
a simple but surprising solution.
It got to the point where neither of them could stand to be in the same room
together. The company clearly suffered under this conflict between two of its
key employees and something clearly needed to be done. Fortunately the CEO had
a simple but surprising solution.
I don't know about you, but I hate conflicts at work. Spending my work days
mad at a co-worker, trying to avoid that person and subconsciously finding fault
with everything they say or do is not exactly my idea of a good time.
I used to be an expert at dodging conflicts on the job and I'm here to tell
you that it just doesn't work! What does work is biting the bullet and doing
something about it here and now. I have seen what looked like huge, insurmountable,
serious conflicts go "poof" and disappear into dust when handled constructively.
I have also seen an itty-bitty molehill of a problem grow into a mountain that
threatened to topple an entire company.
You can't win a conflict at work. Winning a conflict ie. getting the outcome
you want regardless of what the other person wants can be gratifying, sure,
but the problem is that the underlying issue has not been solved. It will simply
reappear later over some other topic. Much better than winning a conflict at
work is resolving it.
And the price of inaction is high, because unresolved, long-running conflicts
result in antagonism, break-down in communications, inefficient teams, stress
and low productivity. In short, unresolved conflicts make people terribly unhappy
at work.
With all of this in mind, here are five essential steps to constructively resolve
conflicts at work. The steps can be applied to any kind of conflict between
co-workers with maybe one exception - read more at the end of the post.
1: Realize that conflicts are inevitable at work
Show me a workplace without conflict and I'll show you a workplace where no
one gives a damn. Whenever people are engaged, committed and fired up, conflict
and disagreement is bound to happen. This doesn't mean you have to revel in
conflict or create trouble just for the hell of it, but it does mean that when
conflict happens it's not the end of the world. Quite the contrary, it can even
be the beginning of an interesting learning process. The very best and most
efficient workplaces are not the ones without conflicts but those who handle
conflicts constructively.
Particularly when a workplace is changing and new ideas are being dreamt up
and implemented, conflict is inevitable. There can be no business change without
conflict. The trick is to make sure that you also have no conflict without change,
because that is the truly dangerous thing: Conflicts that go on for years with
all parties refusing to budge.
The fact that you have a conflict at work does not reflect badly on you - it
mostly means that you care enough to disagree strongly. That's a good thing
provided that you do something about the conflict instead of just letting it
go on forever.
2: Handle conflict sooner rather than later
This is the single most important tip to successfully resolve conflicts: Do
it now! It's very tempting to wait for a conflict to blow over by itself, but
it rarely does - in most cases it only gets worse with time. I refer you to
this delightful cartoon by Claire Bretecher for an example.
90% of conflicts at work do not come from something that was said, but from
something that wasn't said! It's tempting to try and smooth things over and
pretend everything is normal. Don't. That's the most common reason why conflicts
at work escalate: Nobody does anything. Everyone's waiting for the other guy
to pull himself together and "just admit he's wrong, dammit". It may be unpleasant
to tackle the issue here and now but believe me, it gets even more unpleasant
after the conflict has stewed for a good long while.
3: Ask!
In the early stages of a conflict the most powerful tool to resolve it is simple:
Ask! If somebody has done something that made you angry, if you don't understand
somebody's viewpoint, if you don't understand their actions - ask!
Do it nicely. "Say, I was wondering why you did 'X' yesterday" or "I've noticed
that you often do 'Y'. Why is that?" are good examples. "Why the hell do you
always have to 'Z'!" is less constructive :o)
Sometimes there's a perfectly good reason why that person does what he does,
and a potential conflict evaporates right there. Also: Never assume that people
do what they do to annoy you or spite you. People typically have a good reason
to do the things they do, even the things that really get on your nerves. Never
assume bad faith on anyone else's part. Instead: Ask!
4: Giraffe language
For more entrenched conflicts that have been going on for a while, use giraffe
language. It's the best tool around for constructively conveying criticism and
solving conflict.
An example: You and a co-worker often clash at meetings. It's gotten to the
point where each of you are just itching to pounce on the slightest mistake
the other person makes. You can barely stand the sight of each other and have
begun to avoid each other as much as you can. This has been going on for a while
now.
Here's how you can use giraffe language to adress the conflict. There's an invitation
and six steps to it:
Invitation
Invite the other person to talk about the situation. An example: "Say John,
I'd really like to talk to you. Do you have half an hour some time today? We
could meet in meeting room B".
A hurried conversation at your desk between emails and phone calls won't solve
anything. You need an undisturbed location and time to adress the issue. And
make no mistake: Giving this invitation may be the hardest part of the whole
process. It can be remarkably hard to take that first step. Do it anyway!
At the meeting itself, you need a way to structure the conversation constructively.
Otherwise it could easily go like this:
The good thing about giraffe language is that the conversation doesn't degenerate
into mutual accusations. Without a proper structure the meeting could also go
like this:
"John, why are you always attacking me at meetings?"
"What are you talking about - I don't do that!"
"You do. Yesterday you jumped on me for suggesting that we add en extra programmer
to the team."
"We've talked about that a thousand times, we don't have the budget for more
people." "That was no reason to stomp me and the idea at the meeting."
"Well that's what you did to me when I suggested that we review the project
model." Etc. etc. etc.
Ever had one of those discussions at work? Not much fun and not very productive
either! Giraffe language keeps accusations, assumptions and mutual attacks out
of the conversation and makes it much more likely to reach a solution.
Here's how it goes. It's important that you prepare the meeting thoroughly and
write down notes to each step so you know what you're going to say. After each
of the steps (except ii and iii) ask the other person if he agrees with your
thinking and if he'd like to add anything.
i) Observation. Identify what you see in neutral, objective terms.
"John, I've noticed that in our project meetings, we get very critical of each
others ideas. For instance, the other day you suggested reviewing our project
model and I jumped on you for suggesting it, though it's actually a necessary
step. I have noticed that we've ended up doing something like this in almost
every meeting in the last few months. It also seems to be getting worse. Would
you agree with this description of the situation?"
This is where you describe the facts of the situation as objectively as possible.
What is actually happening? When and how is it happening? What is the other
person doing and, not least, what are you doing? You're only allowed to cite
observable facts and not allowed to assume or guess at what the other person
is thinking or doing. You can say "I've noticed that you're always criticizing
me at our meetings" because that's a verifiable fact. You can't say "I've noticed
that you've stopped respecting my ideas" because that assumes something about
the other person.
ii) Apologize. Apologize for your part in the conflict.
"John, I want to apologize for attacking you at the meetings. It has a bad effect
on the mood of our meetings and I can see that it makes you angry. I apologize."
If you're 100%, totally and utterly without fault in the conflict you may skip
this step. That doesn't happen too often, let me tell you, usually everyone
involved has done something to create and sustain the conflict. Remember: You're
not accepting the entire blame, you're taking responsibility for your contribution
to the situation.
iii) Appreciate. Praise the other part in the conflict. Tell them why
it's worth it to you to solve the conflict.
"I know we don't always see eye to eye and that we have very different personalities
but I want you to know that I really appreciate your contribution to the project.
Without you we would never have gotten this far in the same time. Also the way
you communicate with our clients and your ability to find out what they really
want are second to none and a boost to the project."
This can be difficult, few people find it easy to praise and appreciate a person
they disagree strongly with, but it's a great way to move forward. It also serves
as a lithmus test: If you can't think of a single positive thing to say about
the other person, you may not be ready to resolve the conflict yourself. In
this case see tip 5 (mediation) below.
iv) Consequences. What has the conflict led to for you and for the company?
Why is it a problem?
"I don't like this situation we have now. It's making me anxious before meetings
and it's making the meetings less productive. I also think some of the other
project members are starting to wonder what it's all about. Jane asked me the
other day why the two of us can never agree on anything. I think this is actually
harming the project. Would you agree?"
Outlining the consequences of the conflict shows why it's necessary to resolve
the conflict. It also helps participants to look beyond themselves and see the
conflict "from the outside".
v) Objective. What would be a good outcome.
"I would like for us to listen more an appreciate each others ideas more. You
have some great ideas and even if I don't agree with an idea, I can still listen
and make constructive suggestions. Does that sound like a good goal?"
It's essential to set a goal so both parties know the outcome they're aiming
for. That makes reaching the outcome a lot more likely :o)
vi) Request. Ask for specific actions that can be implemented right
away.
"I suggest that we introduce a new rule: At meetings when one of us suggest
something and the other person disagrees, we start by saying what's good about
the idea and then say how it could be better. Also if we start to attack each
other as we have before, I suggest we both excuse ourselves from the meeting
and talk about it in private instead of in front of the entire team. Also, what
do you say we have a short talk after our next project meeting to evaluate how
it went. How does that sound?"
The standard version of giraffe language has four steps and is formulated slightly
differently. What you see here is an adaptation of traditional giraffe language
to the business world that is more suited to conflicts at work.
Why is it called giraffe language? Because the giraffe has the biggest heart
of any animal on dry land (it needs to, to pump blood all the way up to its
brain). The great thing about giraffe language is that:
" It gives structure to a difficult conversation
" It minimizes assumptions and accusations
" It focuses on the real problems not just the symptoms
" It results in a plan of action - not just vague assuarances to do better
5: Get mediation
George, the CEO of Wilbey & Sons, wanted Jane and Scott, his sales and financial
managers, to work well together, but he also knew that something new was need
to break the ice between them. He invited them to a meeting in his office and
as they sat there, next to each other across his desk, the resentment between
them was apparent - you could sense how they were each ready to spring into
action and defend themselves.
His opening took them both by surprise, though. "Jane, would you please tell
me what you admire about Scott." This was not what they had expected, and Jane
needed a moment to get her mind around that particular question.
"Well he it's I have to say that his reports are always excellent and that
his department runs like clockwork. Also he handled that situation with the
bank last month quickly and without a hitch".
The CEO's next question was "And Scott, what do you appreciate about Jane?"
Having heard the first question, Scott was caught less by surprise and smoothly
replied "Sales are up 17% this quarter because of her last campaign and it looks
like the trend will continue.And I must say that the customers I talk to all
like the new pricing structure she introduced."
From that moment on the mood in the room had shifted, and the three of them
could have a real conversation about Scott and Jane's differences and how to
resolve them. Though they never became friends, they were able to work effectively
together and appreciate each other's strengths.
Some conflicts are so entrenched that they can not be solved by the participants
alone; outside help is needed in the form of conflict mediation. Mediation involves
finding a third party trusted by the people involved in the conflict, and then
trusting that person to help find a solution. The mediator can be a manager,
HR employee, a business coach, a co-worker, etc. You can still speed up the
mediation process by preparing for it by using the giraffe language steps above.
What if all of this doesn't work?
There is no guarantee that the method described here will resolve your conflict
at work. It may or it may not. But even if it doesn't work you have the satisfaction
of knowing that you've tried. You have risen above the conflict for a while
and tried to address it positively and constructively. No one can ask more of
you.
One kind of conflict at work is particularly tricky, namely a conflict with
your manager. With a good manager who responds constructively to criticism,
this is rarely a problem, but a conflict with a bad or insecure manager can
seriously impact your working situation and needs special handling. There's
a post coming next week about working with bad managers.
Uploaded By :
Johan
Last Update :
07/10/2008
Printer Friendly Version
Email this to a friend
|