Denying conflict is more damaging than dealing with it.

I am relieved to see that more and more leadership keynote speakers and researchers are writing about the fact that having conflicts in an organization is normal and understandable. It is not disagreements or even anger that cause issues, it is how we deal with them. What kind of process our organization proposes to resolve conflict? Trying to develop a “happiness culture” without a clear definition of what it means tends to confuse our team members, making them think that the organisation will not tolerate conflicts. It can even encourage passive-aggressive communication and increase frustrations.

Conflict is an inevitable part of work. We've all seen situations in which people with different goals and needs have clashed, and we've all witnessed the often intense personal animosity that can result.

Properly dealing with conflicts has some positive effects, such as:

• Better group cohesion: Team members can develop stronger mutual respect and understanding

• Improved self-awareness: Acknowledging conflicts lets us understand what we stand for and, with some emotional intelligence, we can select the appropriate behavior and have the right level of energy to fix it.

• Mitigating risks and avoiding mistakes: Having conflicts forces us to listen to different points of view and to consider different angles. An open mindset can prevent mistakes and failures in the organization.

The issue: to be right or wrong

However, to get those positive effects, an organization must be clear about its conflict resolution process. My point of view is that it is difficult in our Vulnerable, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous world to stand for this kind of process. As William Ury explains to us in a discussion with Simon Sinek (podcast Sinek-Ury), in our current times, a lot of importance is placed on the need to be right, not to be listened to, to fix the issue, or to be understood. The problem with being right is that the only choice for our counterpart is to be wrong. Those attitudes coming from outside our organizations can generate dangerous behaviors inside: coming to war for our beliefs or developing factions in the organization. When we all agree that developing diversity is a strength for the organization, it is a risk to mitigate.

What to do to get positive outputs from conflicts?

To get positive outputs from conflicts, it is important to define a conflict management approach in your organization with pillars such as:

• Putting respect above all other principles; conflicts and disagreements are part of the game and we deal with them using respectful behaviors. We must clearly define what respect means for us without thinking that our team members have the same definition of this notion. Not doing so can lead to increased confusion and bias.

• Training and educating your team about emotional intelligence, active listening, mediation, conflict resolution, and negotiation.

• Not mixing conflict resolution and disciplinary processes. Willingly breaking the rules should lead to sanctions after an investigation process. Making the difference between conflict management and discipline belongs to the managerial layers and the leadership. They are accountable for this. Using tools such as non-violent communication or mediation when a sanction is necessary would be counterproductive.

• Developing coaching and mentoring, internal and external, to support the conflict stakeholders to find the best solution, not only for them but also for the organization.

What is your point of view about this? How do you manage conflict and anger in your organization? Please let me know.

To go deeper on this topic, please refer to the work of William Ury, Christine Porat, or Sophie Galabru

To book a session with Think You! Booking agenda