Resolving
Conflict in Work Teams
Carole A. Townsley (fonte)
Abstract
As organizations continue to restructure to
work teams, the need for training in conflict resolution will
grow. Conflict arises from differences, and when individuals
come together in teams, their differences in terms of power,
values, and attitudes contribute to the creation of conflict.
To avoid the negative consequences that can result from disagreements,
most methods of resolving conflict stress the importance of
dealing with disputes quickly and openly. Conflict is not
necessarily destructive, however. When managed properly, conflict
can result in benefits for a team.
Resolving Conflict
in Work Teams
A major advantage a team has over an individual
is its diversity of resources, knowledge, and ideas. However,
diversity also produces conflict. As more and more organizations
restructure to work teams the need for training in conflict
resolution will continue to grow. Varney (1989) reports that
conflict remained the number-one problem for most of the teams
operating within a large energy company, even after repeated
training sessions on how to resolve conflict and how to minimize
the negative impact on team members. One reason for this may
be that mangers and other leaders within organizations are
not giving the issue of resolving conflict enough attention.
Varney's research showed that although most managers
are aware of disagreements and have received training in conflict
resolution, they seldom assign a high priority to solving
conflict problems. With this in mind, it is critical that
team members possess skills to resolve conflict among themselves.
Conflict arises from differences. When individuals
come together in work teams their differences in terms of
power, values and attitudes, and social factors all contribute
to the creation of conflict. It is often difficult to expose
the sources of conflict. Conflict can arise from numerous
sources within a team setting and generally falls into three
categories: communication factors, structural factors and
personal factors (Varney, 1989). Barriers to communication
are among the most important factors and can be a major source
of misunderstanding. Communication barriers include poor listening
skills; insufficient sharing of information; differences in
interpretation and perception; and nonverbal cues being ignored
or missed. Structural disagreements include the size of the
organization, turnover rate, levels of participation, reward
systems, and levels of interdependence among employees. Personal
factors include things such as an individual's self-esteem, their personal goals, values
and needs. In order for conflict to be dealt with successfully,
managers and team members must understand its unpredictability
and its impact on individuals and the team as a whole.
Conflict in work teams is not necessarily destructive,
however. Conflict can lead to new ideas and approaches to
organizational processes, and increased interest in dealing
with problems. Conflict, in this sense, can be considered
positive, as it facilitates the surfacing of important issues
and provides opportunities for people to develop their communication
and interpersonal skills. Conflict becomes negative when it
is left to escalate to the point where people begin to feel
defeated, and a combative climate of distrust and suspicion
develops (Bowditch & Buono, 1997). Nelson (1995) cautions
that negative conflict can destroy a team quickly, and often
arises from poor planning. He offers this list of high potential
areas from which negative conflict issues commonly arise:
- Administrative Procedures: If the team lacks good groundwork
for what it's doing, its members will not be able
to coordinate their work.
- People Resources: If the team does not have enough resources
to do the job, it is inevitable that some will carry too
heavy a load. Resentment, often unexpressed, may build,
so it is crucial that team leaders ensure adequate resources.
- Cost overruns: Often inevitable, cost overruns become
a problem when proper measures are not taken. The whole
team should know early on when cost becomes a problem so
additional funding can be sought by the team. This way the
problem can be resolved before it grows into a problem for
management.
- Schedules: The schedule is highly consequential to the
team's project and should be highly visible.
All members should be willing to work together to help each
other meet their deadlines.
- Responsibilities: Each team member must know what areas
are assigned and who is accountable for them.
- Wish Lists: Stick to the project at hand and avoid being
sidetracked into trying to fit other things into it. Wait
and do the other things you would like to do after successful
completion of the original project.
Team members can and should attempt to avoid negative conflict
from occurring. Being aware of the potential for negative
conflict to occur, and taking the necessary steps to ensure
good planning will help.
Handling Negative Conflict
When negative conflict does occur there are five accepted
methods for handling it: Direct Approach, Bargaining, Enforcement,
Retreat, and De-emphasis (Nelson, 1995). Each can be used
effectively in different circumstances.
-
Direct Approach: This may be the best approach
of all. It concentrates on the leader confronting the
issue head-on. Though conflict is uncomfortable to deal
with, it is best to look at issues objectively and to
face them as they are. If criticism is used, it must be
constructive to the recipients. This approach counts on
the techniques of problem-solving and normally leaves
everyone with a sense of resolution, because issues are
brought to the surface and dealt with.
-
Bargaining: This is an excellent technique
when both parties have ideas on a solution yet cannot
find common ground. Often a third party, such as a team
leader, is needed to help find the compromise. Compromise
involves give and take on both sides, however, and usually
ends up with both walking away equally dissatisfied.
-
Enforcement of Team Rules: Avoid using this
method if possible, it can bring about hard feelings toward
the leader and the team. This technique is only used when
it is obvious that a member does not want to be a team
player and refuses to work with the rest. If enforcement
has to be used on an individual, it may be best for that
person to find another team.
-
Retreat: Only use this method when the problem
isn't real to begin with. By simply avoiding
it or working around it, a leader can often delay long
enough for the individual to cool off. When used in the
right environment by an experienced leader this technique
can help to prevent minor incidents that are the result
of someone having a bad day from becoming real problems
that should never have occurred.
-
De-emphasis: This is a form of bargaining
where the emphasis is on the areas of agreement. When
parties realize that there are areas where they are in
agreement, they can often begin to move in a new direction.
Managing Cooperative Conflict
Though we often view conflict through a negative lens, teams
require some conflict to operate effectively. Cooperative
conflict can contribute to effective problem solving and decision
making by motivating people to examine a problem. Encouraging
the expression of many ideas; energizing people to seek a
superior solution; and fostering integration of several ideas
to create high-quality solutions (Tjosvold, 1988). The key
is to understand how to handle it constructively. If members
understand how to do it, differences that arise can result
in benefits for a team.
While it is true that suppressed differences can reduce the
effectiveness of a team, when they are brought to the surface,
disagreements can be dealt with and problems can be resolved.
The actual process of airing differences can help to increase
the cohesiveness and effectiveness of the team through the
increased interest and energy that often accompanies it. This
in turn fosters creativity and intensity among team members.
In addition, bringing differences to the surface can result
in better ideas and more innovative solutions. When people
share their views and strive toward reaching a consensus,
better decisions are reached. Team members also improve their
communication skills and become better at understanding and
listening to the information they receive when differences
are freely aired. Fisher, Belgard, and Rayner (1995) offer
these tips on improving listening skills:
- Listen for meaning.
- Understanding is not agreeing.
- Seek clarification before responding, if needed.
- Apply listening skills when receiving a message.
- Evaluate yourself for how well you listened at the end
of any conversation.
The tension of well-managed conflict allows
teams to confront disagreement through healthy discussion
and improve the decisions made (Rayeski & Bryant, 1994).
This leads to greater team efficiency and effectiveness. Effectively
managing conflict allows teams to stay focused on their goals.
Swift and constructive conflict management leads to a broader
understanding of the problem, healthy expression of different
ideas or alternatives, and creates excitement from the positive
interaction and involvement which will help the team through
periods of transition and on to greater levels of performance.
As teams become more responsible for managing
themselves, it is important for organizations to help them
by identifying the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs)
required to handle conflict. Then developing plans to transfer
these skills and capabilities over to their teams. Because
conflict is inevitable in teams, the focus needs to be on
how it is managed. Conflict that is poorly handled creates
an environment of fear and avoidance of the subject. On the
other hand, if properly managed, it can lead to learning,
creativity, and growth.
Team Resolution Process
Rayeski and Bryant (1994) recommend using the Team Resolution
Process to handle conflict when it occurs in teams. Conflict
should first be handled on an informal basis between the individuals
involved. This, they say, will allow time for resolution or
self-correction by the individuals. If the conflict remains
unsettled, a mediator can be brought in to help resolve the
situation. If resolution is still not achieved the dispute
should be openly discussed in a team meeting. A formal discipline
process needs to occur, if resolution is not achieved after
being addressed at the team level. The escalating process
of Team Resolution is as follows:
-
Collaboration (One-on-one): Handle the new
problem person-to-person. Use as many facts as possible
and relate the issue to customer, team, or organizational
needs. Be open and honest and conduct the session in a
private setting. Document the concerns or issues, the
dates, and the resolution, if any, and have both parties
sign it.
-
Mediation (One-on-one with Mediator): If
collaboration did not work or was inappropriate, handle
the problem with a mediator. The mediator must be trained
in conflict resolution, understand policy and ethics,
be trusted by the team, and have the ability to remain
neutral. Gather facts and talk over the issue with the
people involved. Bring up as many facts as possible and
relate the issue to customer, team, or organizational
needs. Be open and honest and conduct the mediation session
in private. Document it and have all parties sign.
-
Team Counseling: The conflict is now a definite
issue to the team. Collaboration and/or Mediation could
not be done, were not appropriate, or did not work. Handle
the conflict at a team meeting; put the problem on the
next agenda and invite the necessary individuals. Again,
bring up the facts, relate the issue to customer, team,
or organizational needs. Be open and honest, discuss it
in a private setting, document it, and have all parties
sign it. Anyone on the team can put an issue or problem
on the team agenda, however, this step should be used
only after Collaboration, and Mediation has been ruled
out.
Because every team is different, disputes that arise will
be too. However, Stulberg (1987) recognizes patterns common
to all controversies. He calls them the Five-P's of Conflict Management:
-
Perceptions: People associate conflict with
negative responses such as anger, fear, tension, and anxiety.
Rarely do we perceive any benefits from being involved
in a dispute. Our negative perceptions impact our approach
in resolving conflict as we strive to eliminate the source
of these negative feelings.
-
Problems: Anyone can be involved in a conflict,
and the amount of time, money, and equipment needed for
resolution will vary according to its complexity.
-
Processes: There are different ways to go
about resolving disputes: Suppress the conflict, give
in, fight, litigate, mediate, etc.
-
Principles: We determine the priorities
of all resolution processes on the basis of an analysis
of our fundamental values regarding efficiency, participation,
fairness, compliance, etc.
-
Practices: Power, self-interest, and unique
situations are all factors relating to why people resolve
disputes the way they do.
Stulberg proposed these patterns as an aid for formal mediators,
but anyone dealing with conflict can benefit from understanding
the elements common to disagreements.
Negotiation
Although there are common patterns, there is no one best way
to deal with conflict. Disputes arise for different reasons
and every team is unique. Varney (1989) proposes that negotiation
is the most effective response to conflict when both parties
stand to gain something, each has some power, and there is
interdependency. Negotiation offers flexibility and viability
other responses, such as Avoidance, Confrontation, and Diffusion
lack. The process of negotiation involves listening to both
sides, seeking out common areas of interest and agreement,
and building on them so that individuals can understand each
other's points of
view. Varney believes there are four essential skills team
leaders need to learn and apply to effectively resolve disagreements
using the negotiation process:
- Diagnosis: Recognizing areas of understanding and areas
of differences.
- Initiation: Bringing the disagreements to the surface.
- Listening: Hearing not only what the other person is saying,
but the Emotional aspects as well.
- Problem Solving: A process with numerous steps including
data gathering, Considering its impact, examining alternatives,
identifying solutions, and developing a plan of action.
In order to resolve their differences, Varney (1989) recommends
bringing the parties together and, with the assistance of
a third party, asking the following questions:
- What is the problem, as you perceive it?
- What does the other person do that contributes to the
problem?
- What do you want or need from the other person?
- What do you do that contributes to the problem?
- What first step can you take to resolve the problem?
Each party should be questioned while the other
listens, asking questions only for clarification. Then the
parties discuss a mutual definition and understanding of the
problem. They should be allowed to express their feelings
and get hostility out of their systems at this stage, but
both parties must be willing to admit partial responsibility
for the problem. This requires good listening, low defensiveness,
and an ability to stay in a problem-solving mode. Agreement
should be reached on what steps will be taken to resolve the
problem, and should be put in writing in order to prevent
later misunderstandings.
The key to Varney's
negotiation process is exposing the different positions as
early as possible. If conflict is left to simmer and then
erupt into open warfare, it becomes much more difficult to
resolve. Revealing the sources of conflict early on enables
people to understand the facts of the dispute, before emotions
get the upper hand, which may allow them to more easily see
their areas of agreement. When agreement areas are identified,
people can then work toward arriving at a consensus and develop
a process for resolving problems in the future.
Fisher et al. (1995) offers a similar five-step approach
to resolving conflict.
- Acknowledge that the conflict exists.
- Gain common ground by putting the conflict in perspective
with the goals and purpose of the team.
- Seek to understand all angles of the disagreement, keeping
in mind that understanding is different from agreement.
- Attack the issue, not each other. Channel anger and hostility
into problem solving and action planning.
- Develop an action plan describing what each person will
do to solve the problem.
This method allows both parties to acknowledge
the nature of the conflict, then jointly work toward resolving
it. As with Varney's
(1989) approach, the key to this process is responding quickly
and effectively when conflict presents itself. Teams are cautioned
to avoid covering up painful issues. Sooner or later, unresolved
issues tend to resurface, often in uglier forms than before.
Along the same lines, teams should not automatically defer
an issue to management, as this disempowers the team. Instead,
they should learn how to handle disputes themselves, requesting
help from management only when their own attempts at resolution
have failed. Fisher et al. (1995) stress that team members
should be encouraged to voice their concerns in team meetings
rather than outside the team setting, in an attempt to avoid
what they call the AParking
Lot Commentary (p. 212). This happens when team members are
afraid to voice feelings to the team so they begin to talk
about team issues in conversations with individuals. When
this occurs it undermines the trust and integrity of the team.
Sources of Conflict Among Project Teams
Though the recognition that conflict can be productive is
not new ( for example, Coser, 1956; Deutsh, 1969), some of
the conflict issues that organizations are dealing with are.
For instance, one study (Kezsbom, 1992) looked at sources
of conflict among project teams and found that the number
one issue developed from goals and priority issues. Previous
literature (Posner, 1986; Thamhain & Wilemon, 1975) presented
the number one source of conflict as being disagreements over
schedules, which ranked at number seven in Kezsbom's study. It makes sense that goals and priority
issues have risen on the list as organizations have evolved
into multi-project, streamlined environments. In these new
complex, hybrid organizations, employees often find themselves
serving on a variety of project teams, being led by a variety
of project mangers while reporting directly to functional
managers. This sets the stage for Kezsbom's third conflict category: communication
and information flow. When reporting relationships are complex
it becomes more difficult to share information.
Personality and interpersonal issues, ranked
in the number two category by those in high technology environments,
presented another dramatic change from previous studies. This
change may be related to the increased use of cross-functional,
self-directed teams in which individuals with technical backgrounds
must rely on the work of others to get their own work done.
This specifically illustrates how important it is to provide
training in communication and interpersonal skills to cross-functional
team members, while emphasizing an appreciation of the value
of differences.
Overall, this study provides valuable insights
for organizations, project leaders, and project team members.
Because goal and priority issues frequently change, communication
must be improved. Kezsbom (1992) makes these recommendations:
- More frequent and effective upward, downward, and team
communications.
- More frequent meetings and status review sessions to increase
communication between functions and minimize inconsistent
perceptions of project goals and priorities.
- Increase human relations training and facilitate more
active team-building efforts.
Organizations must be aware that conflict grows from differences,
but so does innovation. If project teams are properly trained
in human relations and team-building skills, production and
quality measures will increase.
No matter what kind of team it is, no method of managing
conflict will work without mutual respect and a willingness
to disagree and resolve disagreements. Donald Weiss, president
of Self-Management Communication, Inc., believes each person
on the team must be willing to take the following four steps
when a team meeting erupts into a storm (Weiss, 1997): listen,
acknowledge, respond, and resolve remaining differences.
- Listen: To hear what someone else is saying is
not the same as listening. To listen effectively means clearing
your mind of distractions and concentrating not only on
the words but also on nonverbal gestures, which often convey
ninety percent of what the person is trying to say. When
resolving disagreements, you often have to deal with feelings
first.
- Acknowledge: You can acknowledge people's
positions without agreeing with them. Show this with statements
like, "I understand that you're angry,"
"If I understand
you, you think we should", or "Let's explore your opinion further." You may still disagree with them,
but at least they know you've
heard them.
- Respond: You've
listened and acknowledged what the other person is saying.
Now it is your turn to be heard. If you're offering criticism of your teammate's ideas, make sure it's constructive, and if you're disagreeing with them, be ready to
offer an alternative. Be willing, also, to be questioned
or challenged, while avoiding defensiveness when you answer.
- Resolve remaining differences: Define the real problem
by looking for what's causing the disagreement. Then analyze
it into its manageable parts. Now you can generate alternative
solutions to the problem and select the alternative on which
everyone can agree.
For individuals to work effectively in teams
they must be able to clearly communicate their ideas, to listen,
and be willing to disagree. Although it is difficult, learning
to appreciate each other's
differences reflects a team's
ability to manage conflict. When conflict occurs we must not
turn our backs and hope it will go away. Instead, we must
learn to tolerate it, even welcome it, for well-managed conflict
can be the source of change and innovation. As more and more
organizations attempt to make the difficult transition to
teams, they must develop and provide programs for their employees
which offer training in conflict management skills and techniques.
I hope the ideas in this paper can help organizations and
their teams begin, or continue, this challenging task.
References
Bowditch,
J. L., Buono, A. F. (1997). A primer on organizational behavior
(4th ed.). New York, NY: JohnWiley & Sons.
Coser,
L. A. (1956). The functions of social conflict. Glencoe,
IL: The Free Press.Deutsh, M. (1969). Conflicts: Productive
and destructive. Journal of Social Issues, 25 (1),
7 - 41.
Fisher,
K., Rayner, S., Belgard, W., (1995). Tips for teams: A
ready reference for solving common team problems. New
York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Kezsbom,
D. S. (1992). Re-opening Pandora's box: Sources of project
conflict in the >90s. Industrial Engineering, 24
(5), 54 - 59.
Nelson,
M. (1995). Interpersonal team leadership skills. Hospital
Material Management Quarterly, 16 (4), 53 - 63.
Rayeski,
E., & Bryant, J. D. (1994). Team resolution process: A
guideline for teams to manage conflict, performance, and discipline.
In M. Beyerlein & M. Bullock (Eds.), The International
Conference on Work Teams Proceedings: Anniversary Collection.
The Best of 1990 - 1994 (pp. 215 - 221). Denton: University
of North Texas, Center for the Study of Work Teams.
Stulberg,
J. B. (1987). Taking charge / managing conflict. Lexington,
MA: Lexington Books.
Thamhain,
H., & Wilemon, D. L. (1975). Conflict management in project
life cycles. Sloan Management Review, 17 (3).
Varney,
G. H. (1989). Building productive teams: An action guide
and resource book. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass, Inc.
Weiss,
D. H. (1997). Four steps for managing team storms. Getting
ResultsYFor the hands-on Manager, 42 (7), 7.
|