Vasant Kunj, New Delhi | +91 9810 232 822
This is text around a session prepared for NPTI Training on 15th Sept, 2017. This session is part of a One-day National Workshop organised by NPTI at its Faridabad campus. The theme of this National Workshop was Conflict Management : A Strategic Approach for Power Sector.
Introduction
Conflict as described in the corporate context, typically has a negative connotation in our society. This negative connotation automatically triggers within us an aversion to conflicts. Therefore often we find people will either confront it or brush it under the carpet. It is considered unhealthy, undesirable, unproductive and even unprofessional. We need to question this assumption first, even before we start looking for strategies to manage, prevent or mitigate it. Is a conflict necessarily negative? Does it necessarily carry some of the prefixes and adjectives mentioned above? Our level of comfort or discomfort will very likely influence the kind of solutions we try and find. We all know there are no unique solutions to different types of conflicts.
Let us first understand conflict in a cultural context. We belong to a high uncertainty avoidance culture. In cross-cultural psychology, uncertainty avoidance is a society’s tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity. It reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. No wonder we have a popular adage in private as well as business lexicon – ‘don’t open your mouth unless you know the subject well’. Such sayings are so reflective of our high uncertainty avoidance culture. Is this uncertainty about the concept of conflict, the reason why conflict is a viewed with such popular yet negative adjectives? May be reviewing some of these fundamental values and beliefs will throw up some strategic approaches to deal with.
In the following paragraphs, we shall discuss different types of conflict and the causes of such conflicts. Understating the types and sources of conflict may also offer inherent solutions to effectively deal with conflicts. We shall also discuss some other comprehensive strategies to deal with conflicts.
Types of Conflicts
Conflicts could be primarily of 3 types – Task conflict, Process conflict and Relationship conflict. Let us see what they are and how do they impact individuals and/ or organisations.
Task conflict is primarily about ‘what’ and ‘why’ of a job. A conflict around this will mean someone is challenging the bar level of performance. Managing it all leads to a positive competition within team and between individuals. This also helps raise performance bar. People will use their logic and experiences to justify why they think what is being targeted is achievable, optimum or a little stretch. This could also lead to a pursuit of creative and innovative solutions.
Process conflicts are primarily about ‘how’ of a job. This arises when people challenge and existing performance paradigm and question its validity, question it for being outdated and then search for a new and better solution may begin. When an organisation pursues this, they are likely to be on a path of continuous improvement. One of the most effective methods to promote innovation and creativity is to encourage practice of challenging existing paradigms. Most innovative companies in the world follow this method of challenging existing paradigm to stay ahead on the innovation and creativity.
The next is conflicts around relationships. The reasons for these conflicts we shall discuss in a while. Let us first look at what they are and why. These conflicts could be either at individual relationship level or group levels. This is where ‘me’ vs. ‘you’, ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ and the like occurs. This has negative outcomes for sure.
The reason there is difference between outcomes in task and process vs relationship is that relationship conflicts is primarily about ‘person’, while the reason for conflict in other two is about ‘purpose’ or an ‘issue’. When a person gets involved in a conflict, his ego comes into play and that makes handling such conflicts difficult. One of the key coping strategy for any kind of conflict therefore is to focus on ‘issues’ and not ‘person’. Therefore it is relationship based conflict that needs careful strategies for prevention and mitigation. The other two types actually could be encouraged for improved performance.
This background of difference is a good place to understand what are some of the key sources of any kind of conflict. There are primarily 3 sources of conflict – Outcome, Uncertainty and Control. Control being the most important out of these three. If people are certain of what is an outcome they want and why, there will not be any conflict. Most task and process related conflicts come from this. The relationship conflict is
primarily about ‘control’ and therefore it also becomes and emotional issue. When emotions get involved and are at play then logic loses ground, one vs. the other take precedence over everything else.
One of the most effective organisational tool for handling conflicts of any kind is ‘trust’. An interesting insight about trust is that it influences not only outcomes but also perceptions about behaviour that causes/ creates trust. A positive trust creates base for positive outcome and a negative perception creates base for lack of trust. For example, if you trust a person and he behaves in a manner that is not desirable, you will find reasons to justify what he did or reasons to ignore it. But the same behaviour from a person you do not trust will evoke a completely different reaction. So trust or lack of it could feed on itself. That is an interesting and enabling feature of trust but at the same time by same logic a disconcerting one also.
There are two paradigms people could choose to operate on. One is paradigm of trust – I shall trust you till you fail my trust repeatedly. Another is paradigm of mistrust – I shall not trust you until you prove yourself to be trustworthy. If you objectively look at these two paradigms, the first one is preferable. But ask anyone which one do you prefer and which one do you operate on – most people will say prefer the 1st one but operate on the 2nd one. That is the challenge. If we operate on paradigm of mistrust, it is difficult to create trust and also handle conflicts. It is important to begin by acknowledging which paradigm is preferable and if there is a disconnect in what one would prefer and what he currently operates on.
The second step to create a culture of trust, is to encourage openness at work. This could be done by promoting task and process conflicts in a constructive and positive manner. The strategy to promote this positive manner, is by ensuring that all such discussions and debates are around the ‘issue’ and not ‘person’. People should be encouraged to confront issues and discouraged to confront the person. As senior members of organisation, you could also promote a culture where people ask questions around what and why rather than who.
Third effective strategy is to promote focus on leadership behaviour. People ‘see’ more than they ‘listen’ to follow a leader. Do we have positive leadership role models? Create a continuous practice of objective assessment of desired leadership behaviour and reinforcement through learning opportunities. Encourage positive behaviour role modelling – provide positive reinforcements. Focus on positives of individuals and build on it. Culturally we have been told to focus on negatives and work on improving them. This is a sub-optimal solution. Similar time and energy spent on positives will yield much higher impact.
In conclusion, all conflicts are not bad, if we know what they are and how to handle them. Task and Process related conflicts could actually help us improve team and organisational performance, bring healthy positive competition at work and improve collaboration. Relationship based conflicts on the other hand definitely need attention. There are simple ways of dealing with these conflicts – focus on issues and not person behind it; remove the emotional content from a possible conflict dialogue etc. We must find ways to improve trust level within organizations and they could promote ingenue solutions to conflicts. High trust levels could also give a new perspective on disagreements and bases of conflicts. They require positive reinforcements, cultural support and a strong self-image.