#306 from Innovative Leader Volume 6, Number 11          November 1997

Leading Productive Conflict
by Erik J. Van Slyke

Mr. Van Slyke is a principal with HR Alliance, a human resources and organizational development consulting firm in Greensboro, North Carolina (phone 910-665-0395; email EJVanSlyke@aol.com).

Managers who thrive amidst the upheaval, caused by reengineering and downsizing, value conflict.  Managers who lead, encourage conflict. 

Over the past decade, most companies have undergone fundamental changes in the way they do business.  New technologies, deregulation, and stronger foreign firms have increased customer demands for world-class quality as well as higher levels of service and innovation.  These demands have compelled companies to improve and change continuously to cope with the new, more challenging market environment.

While a few of these change efforts have been successful, most have produced average results at best.  One of the more significant reasons for these unsatisfactory results is that changes in business process do not accompany corresponding changes in the way employees think and behave.  Or as identified by John Kotter, of the Harvard Business School, the changes aren’t anchored by the corporation’s culture. 

The traditional corporate culture emphasizes values such as loyalty, unity, harmony and conformity.  A team player is one who doesn’t stand out and contributes by following instructions from management.  The methods these cultures often use to influence the behavior of employees include strict adherence to rules and policies, fear, loss of security (job), rewards, authority and coercion.  While some employees rebel against authority, or “the system,” through absenteeism, medical leaves, or lower productivity, most settle into the comfort zones of their jobs.  They become apathetic, uninvolved and require management direction before taking action.  Employees learn to avoid taking risks because the culture will only squash their sense of individuality and intellect, as they conform to corporate standards.

The need for enhanced responsiveness, increased flexibility, innovation and improvement, however, places heavier demands on organizations.  Success requires employees to get out of their comfort zones, work harder, take on risk and additional responsibilities, and become empowered.  While management changes work load and business process, they most often fail by expecting employees to produce results in the context of the old culture.  Asking for participation and simultaneous conformity poses an apparent contradiction.

Employees want to participate at work and influence the organization.   Empowerment requires, however, that organization leaders learn to be influenced. Participation cannot occur where employees are afraid to take relationship risks with their bosses and coworkers or where they must wait for instruction from management.  The new culture must be anchored by managers who learn to listen and accept different points of view as the very fuel that will sustain competitiveness and innovation.

Create the Environment

Facilitating a culture of productive conflict and resolution requires special skills and sensitivity.  The goal isn’t simply to help people agree, but more importantly, to develop an environment where employees learn to acknowledge conflict and use it to strengthen the organization.  Here are the steps involved:

1.  Provide a framework for collaboration.  A culture of productive conflict requires that we change our own and others’ perception of conflict.  Most people think of conflict as a battle to be won or lost, or a disagreement where one party is right and the other is wrong.  Instead, a win-win, or collaborative approach suggests that conflict is a puzzle to be solved.

Conflict occurs because another party has something we want or need.  This is true even if all we need is acknowledgment of our opinions.  The resulting interdependency requires that we move beyond competition to cooperation.  It also requires that we transcend organizational boundaries, such as hierarchy or turf, that prevent us from admitting there’s a problem or working toward its resolution. 

When we see the conflict as a puzzle, we change our approach.  We will perceive their communication as valuable information--pieces of the puzzle--rather than stubborn persistence.  We become more interested in hearing what they have to say and less obsessed with making our case because we know their perspective is crucial for a final solution.

2.  Exchange thoughts and feelings.  Before we identify solutions, we need to get the issues on the table.  We must analyze the problem, or problems, and the external variables before presenting ideas for resolution.  This helps us treat the causes rather than the symptoms so that problems don’t recur.  This courtesy also ensures that everyone expresses their ideas and perspective. It requires that the parties listen to one another, making sure not to interrupt or offer counterstatements.

This best exchange occurs when we create an atmosphere where the parties go beyond stating positions to clarifying their true interests.  This means that we need to identify the motivators or drivers at the core of the stated position.  For example, when we peel away the layers behind the position “I want a raise,” we might uncover, “I want more money . . . to have a better lifestyle  . . . to impress my family and friends . . . because I work hard and deserve it . . . I don’t feel that is recognized . . . and it will help me feel better about myself.” 

The core need, in this case, is improved self-esteem.  If the only solution were to give the employee a raise, we wouldn’t have solved the real problem.  Their dissatisfaction would cause the conflict to resurface in one form or another at a later date.

In a culture of productive conflict we must actively listen for the unspoken, and often more powerful, messages.  People aren’t always aware why they have taken a particular position on an issue.  We, therefore, must invite them to express their intuition and feelings as well as their more cognitive thoughts. A good exchange helps us uncover core needs, underlying differences between positions and the common objectives that serve as the foundation for agreement.

3.  Understand the perspectives.  Organization leaders must facilitate understanding.  Understanding means becoming aware of all the cues the other party emits and remaining open to what isn’t said as well as what is said.  Often, people send mixed messages.  For example, a person might say, “I’m not angry”--but his red face, clenched fists and locked jaw suggest otherwise.

Active listening requires objectivity and empathy.  The listener must disengage from the situation so that he or she can understand what’s being said without personalizing it.  That may mean listening to something unpleasant in order to understand underlying thoughts, emotions, and perceptions.  To do this, we must acknowledge and accept the other party’s perspectives, and send signals of interest and concern.  It means we must admit to ourselves that the other person has important needs that should be satisfied by our final solution.

When the other person feels we understand them both conceptually and emotionally, we create an important emotional bond.  This trust increases cooperation and allows each party to reveal important information needed to resolve the conflict.

4.  Create options for mutual gain.  If we first analyze the problem and identify the core interests, we create the criteria for solutions.  “Solutions” is plural because we always have more than one alternative.  Some alternatives are more preferable than others, but until we create choices, we’re playing a win-lose game.  When we perform a thorough analysis, we create a results-oriented process built upon a mutually agreed-upon end.

The essence of productive conflict is valuing differences.  This doesn’t imply that we have to agree with the other party’s perspective, only that we respect it and see it as important for long-term results.  These differences help us create solutions that are better than those we could produce individually.  When both parties feel understood and respected, cooperative solutions begin to flow. 

5.  Reach consensus and agreement.  Once options have been identified, the participants should evaluate solutions.  The resolution to the conflict must meet the legitimate needs of everyone and be perceived as fair.  Before accepting the solution, review the issues, each party’s objectives and the final agreement.  This will help prevent “buyer’s remorse” and make each participant feel more secure about the results.  Gain commitment to implementation and establish a follow-up date for review.

Consensus is achieved when each party feels he or she has been heard and understood.  Consensus also means that each party is able to live with the solution and is willing to commit to his or her role during implementation.  If agreement cannot be reached, then the parties must keep exchanging thoughts and feelings.  If there’s still no consensus, then someone should suggest a trial period where various solutions can be tested before making a final decision.

By guiding conflict from positional disagreement to an exchange of ideas, we create an atmosphere of understanding and trust.  This helps employees gain the confidence needed to participate more fully in leading the organization during times of change.  Individuals see conflict as an opportunity to learn and understand.  By encouraging productive conflict we create a collaborative culture that satisfies both the organization’s need for innovation, flexibility, and responsiveness and the employee’s need for individuality and growth.