Last month I suggested that constructive conflict is about ideas and issues, not persons and personalities. While I believe this to be true, in a significant respect conflict is always personal. We cannot help but bring who we are into any discussion that we have. And the more invested in the topic we are, the more important it is to understand this point.
Most of us would like to think that any time a discussion occurs that we simply hear the information, objectively evaluate it, offer our opinion, and then move on to the decision. We like to think that ‘this is just business and emotions don’t play a part in business or work decisions’. However, this is usually not the case. In fact our emotions are always involved in every decision we make because we are human and emotions are an inherent part of us.
What really happens is that we hear information through a series of filters that affects a great deal how we interpret and evaluate it. Our commute to work can set the tone for the entire day. An argument with a family member can make us more aggressive or defensive at work. Good news outside of work can easily translate into a more optimistic view of life at work. And these are just the ‘little’ things. There are also the bigger, more ingrained elements that make us who we are. How we were raised, the kind of conflict we have experienced in the past, our personalities, what has been our past experience with the person we are now having the conflict with: all of these, and countless other factors, play an integral part in how we might manage a current difficult situation.
So when I suggest that constructive conflict is about ideas and issues, not persons and personalities, I am not saying that we should strive to participate in ‘emotion-less conflict’, but rather that we work towards a better understanding of our own emotional make up, the emotional make up of our team-mates, and what factors might actually be influencing the discussion. This can take a great deal of time and effort, but the individuals and teams who put this kind of effort in have a much greater chance of being able to have constructive rather than destructive conflict. Teams that do this get to the core of the issue at hand, recognize the emotional components involved, and weigh all those pieces appropriately. A good discussion, or even a good decision, is not an emotionless one, it is one that has considered and acknowledged all or as many of the contributing factors as possible.
Obviously there is a great deal of detail and variety that goes into this process. We are not looking for easy boxes to put people in. But understanding who we are and who are teammates are can be a significant step in allowing us to avoid destructive conflict. Anticipating our own ‘hot buttons’ can be a good thing. Understanding what pushes a team-mate’s buttons can be used negatively against them, but in a trusting environment it can also be a great opportunity to listen more closely and respectfully to their viewpoint.
There are many resources and tools you can use to work through this. As I have mentioned before, I am a fan of Patrick Lencioni’s material, and in his book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, he offers some helpful information on this theme. I use his conflict resolution model in my team building seminars and find it to be a great discussion starter. If it would be helpful, I would be happy to assist your team in beginning to work through some of this.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, October 20th, 2011 at 11:52 am and is filed under Comments.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Constructive Conflict Part Two: It’s Always Personal
Most of us would like to think that any time a discussion occurs that we simply hear the information, objectively evaluate it, offer our opinion, and then move on to the decision. We like to think that ‘this is just business and emotions don’t play a part in business or work decisions’. However, this is usually not the case. In fact our emotions are always involved in every decision we make because we are human and emotions are an inherent part of us.
What really happens is that we hear information through a series of filters that affects a great deal how we interpret and evaluate it. Our commute to work can set the tone for the entire day. An argument with a family member can make us more aggressive or defensive at work. Good news outside of work can easily translate into a more optimistic view of life at work. And these are just the ‘little’ things. There are also the bigger, more ingrained elements that make us who we are. How we were raised, the kind of conflict we have experienced in the past, our personalities, what has been our past experience with the person we are now having the conflict with: all of these, and countless other factors, play an integral part in how we might manage a current difficult situation.
So when I suggest that constructive conflict is about ideas and issues, not persons and personalities, I am not saying that we should strive to participate in ‘emotion-less conflict’, but rather that we work towards a better understanding of our own emotional make up, the emotional make up of our team-mates, and what factors might actually be influencing the discussion. This can take a great deal of time and effort, but the individuals and teams who put this kind of effort in have a much greater chance of being able to have constructive rather than destructive conflict. Teams that do this get to the core of the issue at hand, recognize the emotional components involved, and weigh all those pieces appropriately. A good discussion, or even a good decision, is not an emotionless one, it is one that has considered and acknowledged all or as many of the contributing factors as possible.
Obviously there is a great deal of detail and variety that goes into this process. We are not looking for easy boxes to put people in. But understanding who we are and who are teammates are can be a significant step in allowing us to avoid destructive conflict. Anticipating our own ‘hot buttons’ can be a good thing. Understanding what pushes a team-mate’s buttons can be used negatively against them, but in a trusting environment it can also be a great opportunity to listen more closely and respectfully to their viewpoint.
There are many resources and tools you can use to work through this. As I have mentioned before, I am a fan of Patrick Lencioni’s material, and in his book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, he offers some helpful information on this theme. I use his conflict resolution model in my team building seminars and find it to be a great discussion starter. If it would be helpful, I would be happy to assist your team in beginning to work through some of this.
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 20th, 2011 at 11:52 am and is filed under Comments. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.