Log in to view the full article
Does your workplace seem to have more than its share of employee conflicts? You are not alone. When people work together, it seems there are always personality clashes, hurt feelings, imagined insults, and misunderstandings about who said what, when, and to whom.
Workplace friction costs money. Embittered employees usually take out their feelings on customers, who go straight to the competition. Important work activities slow to a crawl when irritated workers won't cooperate with each other. In extreme cases, conflicted personnel deliberately sabotage your business.
"Conflict management is absolutely a bottom line issue for managers," says Daniel Dana,president of the Dana Mediation Institute in Overland Park, Kan. "Good managers learn how to take action when workplace conflicts disrupt the business." Do it right and you keep people longer. Says Dana: "Our studies show that from90 to 95 percent of all terminations are related to unresolved workplace conflicts."
How do you tame the dogs of workplace war? Here are some possible answers.
Conflict No. 1: Employees say they don't like working with Joe because he is too abrasive. He barks orders in short, clipped statements that invite little feedback. But because Joe gets things done fast, you like to give him projects to complete with the help of others.
Sound familiar? Stewart Levine, a mediation consultant in Alameda, Calif., says "Joe falls into the category of a 'difficult person' ", says Levine. "He exhibits aggressiveness and perhaps a little hostility when he interacts with other people."
Here's your suggested course of action. "Start sharing a little effective feedback with Joe,"suggests Levine. Schedule a private meeting to discuss what you are observing. "I would start by telling Joe about his behavior as it has been reported by individuals who work with him."
You might say, for example, "Hey, Joe, here is some information I am getting from a number of individuals who have been working with you over the past three months. I would like to get some feedback from you."
"Emphasize that the information comes from others," says Levine. "Be very careful to put your words in context. You are sharing this information not to call Joe on the carpet, but so he can learn something and everyone can work together better. This is all about learning, not about making Joe wrong."
Then give Joe the opportunity to respond. "Ask Joe what he can share about this," says Levine. "Then suggest some things that Joe can learn by way of resources to improve his communication skills. These may be books,seminars or audiotapes."
You may be pleasantly surprised at Joe's reaction to this initial meeting. "Sometimes people don't know others are reacting to them in negative ways,"says Levine. "People are often thankful when that information is shared."
Conflict No. 2: You knew Sam would be upset when you promoted Ann to that marketing position three months ago. Even though Ann was more qualified,Sam had been bucking for the job for a long time. But Sam's hurt feelings seem to be getting a little out of hand. Just this morning you heard him tell a coworker that Ann was given the promotion "just because she's a woman." You're starting to worry: Should you take Sam aside and counsel him?
Don't be too quick to counsel Sam,says Erik J. Van Slyke, a principal with HR Alliance, a human resources consulting firm in Greensboro, N.C. While it may seem at first glance that Sam has a dispute with Ann or with your business, that's not the case. "Sam's real problem is with himself:He has not yet dealt with his emotions surrounding not getting the promotion," says Van Slyke. "You need to realize that you are not responsible for solving Sam's problem. If you intervene too soon,you teach Sam that he is not responsible for himself."
The time to take action is when Sam's performance starts to suffer or his interaction with other employees deteriorates. If this occurs, schedule a meeting with Sam, with the primary purpose of allowing him to open up and talk, says Van Slyke. Start by describing what you have recorded about Sam's performance, then "go into listening mode to let Sam open up and say what he needs to say,"says Van Slyke.
At some point you need to set up an action plan so Sam's work placeperformance will return to what it was. Place the task of finding a solution on Sam's shoulders.
You might say: "I think I understand how you feel. You are justified from your perspective in feeling as you do and I am not asking you to feel differently. But I am asking you to make sure it doesn't impact productivity. What suggestions do you have for keeping this problem from having a negative effect on your work?"
Schedule another meeting down the road to follow up on the suggestions that Sam makes.
Conflict No. 3: Marilyn, who joined your staff six months ago,has not been able to open up at meetings. You think you know why. Robert, another staff member, shot down one of her ideas in words that disparaged the proposal and humiliated her. Now Marilyn figures it's safer to remain silent.
Begin by separating what you directly observe from what you imagine to be happening. You have seen that Marilyn has become withdrawn since Robert made his remark. You surmise she is doing soin response to her coworker's comments. You need to correctly identify the root of the problem. Dana of the Dana Mediation Institute suggests this approach:"Schedule a meeting with Marilyn to either confirm your perception of Marilyn's problem or uncover the real reason why she is withdrawn." Avoid volunteering your hypothesis since Marilyn may deny it out of embarrassment or fear that she may rock the boat. Instead, Dana suggests,"Show the data that is indisputable,then share the realities."
He suggests an approach such as this: "I've noticed that you have been quiet in meetings since about the time that Robert made his comment. I am wondering what is going on here."
In a separate meeting with Robert,you might say, "I've observed that Marilyn has been quiet since your comment. I wonder what your observation is."
Give both people an opportunity to tell you, in your role as a noncritical manager, what they think about the situation. "There is some catharsis achieved, and a reduction of tension, in these meetings," says Dana. "And they prepare each employee to be better able to talk with each other."
Let each employee know that you will shortly schedule a three-person meeting, during which you will not solve the problem for them but instead be a mediator. Your presence is simply intended to help the conversation stay on the issue.
During the group meeting, the two employees discuss the issue while you remain as a fairly silent moderator. "Predictably, 90 percent of the time this meeting solves the problem," says Dana. "After awhile,the two individuals reach an attitude shift from me-versus-you to us versus-problem. Then the technical solution becomes clear. Robert may apologize for the harsh statement, or agree to not make critical comments in front of others."
Key point: The essence of mediation is that people solve their own problems.
Not every conflict can be resolved,but every one can be managed through communication with the individuals who are in conflict.
People get very little training on how to deal with conflict. But you can be sure that disagreements will continue to arise. By just accepting that fact — and treating it as natural— you are in a much better position to do something about it.
USE THE THREE RS, NOT DADA
The employee who shares an inner conflict with you is looking for emotional understanding, not rational explanation. In such situations avoid using common tools involving intellectual analysis.
Erik J. Van Slyke, a principal with HR Alliance, a human resources consulting firm in Greensboro, N.C., says that four of the most common ones to avoid have the acronym of DADA: Discount, Advise, Derail and Analyze.
In the following scenario, Sam is upset because he wanted a promotion that was given to someone else. Here are examples of how a manager might mismanage the situation, and why each approach doesn’t work:
Discount: “Oh, don’t worry about it, Sam. Everything will be okay.” That could be true, but Sam is hurting now. He will be irritated that you are minimizing the issue.
Advise: “Let’s review Ann’s qualifications for that position. I think you will evaluate my decision differently.” You are advising Sam to approach the issue in an analytical way. But Sam already knows your decision was correct. His real problem is hurt pride.
Derail: “Yeah I know. I was passed over for promotion once myself.” You are derailing the issue by shifting the focus onto your own experiences. You need to let Sam open up and discuss his concerns.
Analyze: “Have you ever felt this way before?” Or: “Why do you think that your capabilities were better suited for this job?” Analyzing is another form of advising. You are asking questions to get Sam thinking rationally about the issue. But Sam’s problem is emotional, not rational.
Instead of DADA, says Van Slyke, use the three Rs of repeating, rephrasing and reflecting. When you repeat, you simply restate what Sam says in his own words. Example: “You feel Ann was promoted because she was a woman.”
When you rephrase you recast what Sam says on an intellectual level: “You feel it is unfair because you have put in more years than Ann.”
When you reflect, you reconstruct Sam’s statements on an emotional level: “It sounds as though you are pretty disappointed that you were not given the promotion.”
“The beauty of reflection is that it builds a bridge in the relationship between you and Sam,” says Van Slyke. “It’s one thing to understand intellectual content but another to understand emotions. Sam’s not sure what he is feeling. He knows he feels anger but he is also concerned about his future.” By reflecting, you show Sam that you care about what he is feeling. This encourages Sam to talk on his terms, not yours.