Archive for Resolving Conflict – Page 2

Take the Conflict Confidence Quiz

In my work with clients of all kinds, I have noticed five basic types of response to conflict. I see people who are…

Conflict Rock Stars

Conflict Rock Stars are almost always in control of their responses. They know how to communicate calmly and assertively in nearly every situation. Their response seems easy and effortless to the outside observer.

Conflict Confident

People who are Conflict Confident demonstrate appropriate responses to most conflicts. They respond in ways that lead to resolution rather than to escalation. Even though they might feel some unease or discomfort in conflict,  they engage confidently and lead towards resolution.

Conflict Quesy

The Conflict Quesy person either gets a knot in their stomach or a little flash of anger that causes them to be a little too passive or a little too aggressive. In fact, they might switch between to0 aggressive, too passive and confident responses in the same encounter. In general, they do pretty well in conflict, and they respond in ways that feel like they will lead to resolution. However, they are often confused and frustrated when their responses unintentionally escalate conflicts.

Conflict Chickens

Conflict Chickens run from conflict almost every time. They avoid confrontation and conflict to the point that they fail to engage even when needed to resolve the situation. Their failure to engage often leads to escalation rather than deescalation because the issues causing the conflict remain unresolved.

Conflict Coercers

Conflict Coercers are on the other end of the spectrum from Conflict Chickens. They often dive in to conflict and push for resolution in a way that inflames rather than calms the situation. They sometimes think they have resolved a conflict when they drive a Conflict Chicken to silence or out of the conversation.

I did not derive these categories from a sophisticated and comprehensive statistical analysis. So please, don’t over read them. They are simply built on my observations from working and talking with lots of people about their responses and approaches to conflict and then observing how the conflicts develop and end.

It seems that most people are in the Conflict Quesy category. There are also a pretty significant number of Conflict Chickens and Conflict Coercers. There are fewer Conflict Confident people, and fewer still Conflict Rock Stars.

The good news is that no matter where you start, you can become Conflict Confident. With enough study and practice, you could even become a Conflict Rock Star. The growth in your conflict resolution skills begins when you learn to accurately diagnose and read conflict situations and how to respond appropriately — confidently — to the conflict.

Conflict Confidence is a learned skill. It is not a natural talent.

Take the Conflict Confidence Quiz


Successful conflict resolution depends on the careful application of several communication and relationship building principles and skills. Frankly, it can be complicated and difficult to do.

One critical skill in the complicated mess of conflict resolution is assertive communication. As I speak, write, coach, and train on the application of assertive communication techniques and strategies, I get many questions related to this topic. One of the most common questions relates to the potential risks of choosing to communicate assertively.

The question takes many forms, but it generally comes down to this:

When is it safe to speak assertively with another person?

This is a great question because it acknowledges the potential risk of confronting another person’s behaviors. The conflict resolution process is full of various kinds of risks. There are usually relational risks. Sometimes there are financial risks. And occasionally there are physical risks.

I understand the risks. I see the risks.  And I have to deal with the risks when I find myself in a real or potential conflict situation. To manage or mitigate these risks, I have developed three questions I ask of myself before I make the choice to communicate assertively.

  1. Is there a way to act assertively that minimizes the risk of retaliation?

    The starting point for mitigating the risk begins with taking a close look inwardly to see if there is a way I can adjust my behaviors to make it safe for the other person to receive what I have to say. With this question, I hope to find a way that I can deliver my message in a non-threatening manner.

  2. Do I trust the other person to respond honorably and without retaliation?

    If the answer to this question is yes, then I proceed with the assertive communication. If the answer is no, then I ask myself the third question.

  3. Am I willing to accept the consequences if they do not?

    This question reveals some additional risks raised by the question: Can Every Conflict Be Resolved? If I am willing to accept the consequences, then I proceed. If I am not willing to accept the consequences, then I look for another path to resolution.

These questions do not address every variable and every situation you might face in working to resolve a conflict. They are pretty good guidelines for making decisions about how to proceed in a conflict situation.

I often get asked if every conflict can be resolved. Since I work with leaders and teams to resolve workplace conflicts and to build the confidence people have to address conflicts, I think it’s a really good question.

The short answer is: yes, every conflict can be resolved.

The question does have one problem though — it is incomplete.

It is incomplete in that people often ask the question with an unspoken assumption about the outcome of the resolution process. When I add the assumption to the question, it becomes…

Can every conflict be resolved and also preserve the relationship?

By adding the criteria that the relationship is preserved, the answer changes from yes to no.

Sad, possibly a bit harsh, and still true.

The operating definition that I work from for a successful conflict resolution is that the involved parties have come to an agreement about their future behaviors and interactions with regard to each other that ends, or resolves, the conflict.

In most situations, reasonable people can reach agreement on how they will interact with each other that both preserves the relationship and resolves the conflict.

Sadly, there are situations where the cost of the agreement exceeds the value that one or the other party (possibly both parties) assign to the relationship. The cost of the agreement can be measured in terms of the  financial, emotional, or physical effort implications of accepting the changed behavior. When the cost of the changed behavior exceeds the value of the relationship, the relationship will usually end — eventually if not immediately.

Ending the relationship is agreeing to end routine interactions so it qualifies as an agreement about future behaviors and interactions. Therefore, it would qualify as a conflict resolution.

It is not necessarily a happy resolution. It is a resolution.

Can every conflict be resolved?

Yes.

Can every conflict be resolved and also preserve the relationship?

No.

1 Categories : Resolving Conflict

I’m conducting two-day Conflict Confidence courses — sponsored by my friend, colleague and co-author Kevin Eikenberry .

Here’s a quick video I created about my personal journey to develop conflict resolution skills…

You can get more info about the workshop here.

0 Categories : Resolving Conflict

Many people rise to leadership positions because they can solve problems. That was certainly true for me. One of the reasons I quickly moved from an individual contributor role to a supervisory position in my first civilian job after the Navy was that I knew how to solve the technical problems my team faced.

I’m guessing that you have a similar experience. You have a history of solving problems well, and that ability created an opportunity for you to become formally recognized as a leader. As you become a leader, though, your responsibility is less about your personal ability to solve problems and more about your ability to work with others to solve problems.

While the skills of the individual problem solver and the group problem solver are similar, there are also some major differences. The individual problem solver can assess a situation and jump to action. As long as the problem gets solved, everyone is happy. The group problem solver has to build consensus, encourage and inspire others, and create buy-in for a proposed solution.

This consensus/inspiration/buy-in piece is often where leaders go wrong as group problem solvers. They see the problem, they identify a solution, and they go to work trying to get everyone onboard with the solution. Then they hit a brick wall.

  • People question the solution.
  • People doubt the need to make changes.
  • People hold on to old ways of doing things. And,
  • The leader gets frustrated.

There are lots of great tools and techniques you can apply to become a better communicator, to build your influence, and to develop your persuasion skills. All of these tools and techniques have their place in your leadership tool box, and you will probably use them all as you work to solve problems with a group. However, these tools and techniques are secondary to a fundamental premise of group problem solving behavior:

When people don’t agree on the problem definition, they will never agree on the problem solution.

For example, your company has low revenues one quarter. If you think the problem is a failure to close on new leads and Joe thinks that the problem is a failure to get qualified leads, your proposed solution will be totally different from Joe’s.

As a result, you will waste time and energy trying to convince each other of the “right” way to solve the revenue shortfall with very little likelihood of reaching a mutually agreeable solution.

As you work with your team, resist the urge to propose solutions before you have invested the time on the front-end of each problem solving effort to ensure that everyone has a common definition of the problem. Set aside your desire to leap to action in the interest of building consensus. In the end, you will get greater returns and better results as you release all of the creative energies of your team in a common, focused direction.

Clearly define the problem. Then, work to create buy-in for the problem definition before you even begin to discuss possible solutions.

 Action Step #1: Think about a recent group problem solving effort that went well and another where your team struggled. Did your team have a clear and common definition of the problem in both cases? Reflect on what you can learn from comparing these two efforts.

Action Step #2: Think about a current group problem solving effort. Do you have a clear and commonly understood definition of the problem? If not, meet with your team in the next 24 hours to create a clear problem definition statement.

My daughter shared a short poem with me today that struck me with its simplicity and wisdom. While it’s not the first time I have seen it, it did resonate strongly with me when she read it.

It pretty much sums up my general philosophy and approach to conflict resolution. I

Here it is…

Charity

There is so much good in the worst of us,
And so much bad in the rest of us,
That it ill behooves  any of us
To find fault with the rest of us.

- Author unknown

Votaire

Francois-Marie Arouet Voltaire, 1694-1778

In a conflict, it is often tempting to go on the attack in an effort to make your point. In fact, it’s a natural response to a situation you perceive as physically or emotionally threatening in some way.

In most workplace situations, none of us will be in an imminent physical threat situation when we are in conflict. Most of us will, however, experience what we perceive as an emotional threat.  We feel threats to our position, our expertise, or our experience. We feel disrespected, disliked, or unheard.

All of these situations feel threatening, and they are not physically threatening. Thus, our natural response is not likely to be the best response.

This weekend, I read about a situation where the French author and philosopher Voltaire was in actual physical danger, and he used the power of relating to his opponents to turn the situation.

In 1726, Voltaire was exiled to England as the result of a conflict he had with a powerful and influential French family.  At the time of his three-year stay in England, there was a great deal of friction between France and England. This friction between the two nations occasionally put Voltaire at odds with the people he met in his new host country. Sometimes, he was in truly physically threatening circumstances.

One day, he found himself caught in an angry street mob1 that shouted things like: “Hang him. Hang the Frenchman!”

Confronted with this challenge, Voltaire replied: “Men of England! You wish to kill me because I am a Frenchman. Am I not punished enough in not being born an Englishman?”

The crowd then cheered and escorted him back to his home.

In a moment of physical threat, Voltaire won the crowd and his safety by connecting and relating with them. If it worked for Voltaire, it just might work for you in much less challenging situations.

Learn to use the power of tact and relationship to turn conflicts towards resolution and away from escalation.

1 Fadiman, Clifton; Editor. The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes. Boston. 1985. 566. Print.