Conflict Management Strategies
Read this chapter, which defines conflict, describes various conflict styles, and offers effective conflict management strategies. Try to answer some of the exercise questions at the bottom of each section.
Leadership and Conflict
Learning Objectives
- Describe four roles that a leader might play with respect to conflict.
- Assess the effectiveness of leadership behavior exhibited in an illustrative academic situation.
"The
hope of the world is that wisdom can arrest conflict between brothers. I
believe that war is the deadly harvest of arrogant and unreasoning
minds".
- Dwight Eisenhower
To lead a group successfully through conflict requires patience, good will, and determination. Robert Bolton noted that leaders with low levels of defensiveness tend to help people in their organizations avert unnecessary strife because they are able to focus on understanding and dealing with challenges rather than on saving face or overcoming resistance from others in their groups. Bolton also wrote that employing power judiciously, displaying charisma, and employing effective communication skills can positively affect the way conflict is handled. In this section we will examine four general roles a leader may adopt with respect to preparing for inevitable instances of conflict. We will also provide an example of how one leader adopted the fourth role in a conflict situation.
The Leader as Motivator
Just
as it takes more than one person to create conflict, it generally
requires more than a single individual to resolve it. A leader should,
therefore, try somehow to cause other members of a group to identify
benefits to themselves of engaging in productive rather than destructive
conflict. Randy Komisar, a prominent Silicon Valley executive who has
worked with companies such as WebTV and TiVo and co-founded Claris
Corporation, had this to say about the importance of this kind
motivational role as his companies grew:
"I found that the art
wasn't in getting the numbers to foot, or figuring out a clever way to
move something down the assembly line. It was in getting somebody else
to do that and to do it better than I could ever do, in encouraging
people to exceed their own expectations; in inspiring people to be
great; and in getting them to do it all together, in harmony. That was
the high art". We'll talk later about specific strategies that
leaders and other group members can employ to manage conflict by means
of motivation and other strategies.
The Leader as Delegator
No
leader, even the leader of a handful of other people in a small team,
can handle all the challenges or do all the work of a group. In fact,
you've probably encountered leaders throughout your life who either
exhausted themselves or alienated other group members - or both! -
because they tried to do just that. Beyond accepting the sheer
impossibility of shouldering all of a group's work, a leader can attempt
to prevent or manage conflict by judiciously by acting as a delegator,
turning over responsibility for various tasks to others.
Warren
Bennis, a pioneer in the field of leadership, wrote that such delegation
is a vital component of the leader's role. When it is practiced
skillfully, according to Bennis, delegation may confine conflicts to the
levels at which they occur and free the leader to conduct higher-level
undertakings.
The Leader as "Structuralist"
Michael Thomas, a professor for many years at the University of Texas, served as a respected consultant to numerous businesses and educational institutions. As he went from group to group, he tackled their problems primarily by reviewing their organizational charts and tinkering with their structure. As an admired organizational theorist and structuralist, he believed that nearly any problem, tension, or conflict in a group could be solved structurally How people behave, he said, is largely determined by where they sit in an organization and whom they report to and supervise. If Mike saw that people in two separate sections of a group were at odds, for instance, he would propose that the sections be consolidated so that both became responsible to the same supervisor. Mike certainly used further techniques in his consultant's role, but his emphasis on structural changes stands as one kind of advice for leaders who hope to lessen the damaging effects of conflict in their groups.
Realistic
Conflict Theory, or Realistic Group Conflict Theory (RGCT), likewise
stresses the importance for leaders of configuring subgroups within a
larger group so that they are required to meet common goals. A classic
study by social psychologist Muzafer Sherif with 22 twelve-year-old boys in a summer camp in
Oklahoma exemplifies the nature of RGCT and illustrates the concept of
"leader as structuralist".
The boys were split into two groups at
the start of the study, after which leaders quickly emerged in each
group. The two groups were then required to compete in camp games and
were rewarded on the basis of their performance. Soon conflict arose as
negative attitudes and behavior developed within each group toward the
other.
In the third part of the study, the structure of the camp
was changed in such a way that the two antagonistic groups were called
upon to share responsibility for accomplishing a variety of tasks. The
outcome of this structural change was that attitudes within each group
toward the other became favorable and conflict lessened
dramatically.
Paradoxically, a leader may also deal with conflict by
separating people rather than bringing them together. If a team is
experiencing internal conflict that seems to be related to intense
personality differences between two individuals, for instance, the
leader may decide to change the composition of the team so as to reduce
their interaction. (Think about the third-grade teacher who finds two
children pummeling each other during recess and sends them to opposite
ends of the schoolyard).
The Leader as Promoter of "Constructive Deviation"
Civil disobedience. . . is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience…The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.
- Howard Zinn
I
was at a conference in Jackson Hole, talking with Peter McLaren and
Donaldo Macedo and David Gabbard. This guy in a herring-bone suit, all
prim and proper, came over and said, "Well, Dr. Macedo, very, very
interesting talk. I enjoyed it very much. Dr. Gabbard, very interesting
talk. I enjoyed it very much".
He was going around being polite.
And then he turned and looked at Peter McLaren, and he said, "Mr.
Mclaren..". - not "doctor" - "your discourse stretches my comfort zone
just a little too much".
And before any of us could say anything,
Donaldo turned to him and said, "There are millions of people born,
live their entire lives, and die on this planet without ever knowing the
luxury of a comfort zone".
The guy was speechless. It was a very
polite way for him to say, "You know, I'm tired of hearing white men
tell me that they're feeling a little oppressed by discourse".
The
guy walked away, and Peter McLaren turned to me and said, "F**k! Why
didn't I say that?" But that's Macedo. Macedo is on his toes, all the
time. He's never caught tongue-tied. He knows exactly how to turn it
around.
- Roberto Bahruth
A deviate is someone who differs
in some important way from the rest of a group. Research indicates
that interaction with deviates may account for up to a quarter of many
groups' time and that such interaction may serve a positive function if
it successfully causes people who hold a majority opinion to examine
their views critically. In essence, dealing with deviates can keep group
members on their toes and counteract the tendency to engage in
groupthink. Encouraging deviates is one measure a leader can take to
promote constructive conflict which brings a group to a higher level of
understanding and harmony.
Of course, listening to a deviate may
be disconcerting, since it may push us outside our comfort zone in the
way that Peter McLaren did in the story told by Roberto Bahruth. In
fact, deviates naturally have great difficulty influencing a group
because of other people's resistance. For this reason, part of a
leader's responsibility may sometimes consist in simply making sure that
a deviate is not outright silenced by members of the majority. In other
cases, it is the leader who at least at times assumes the role of
deviate herself or himself.
Because deviates by their very nature
call the members of the majority in a group to stop and seriously
question their attitudes and behavior, which is usually disconcerting
and uncomfortable, the most successful deviates are generally those who
attempt to lead others in a cautious fashion and who demonstrate loyalty
to their group and its goals. Timing can also determine
whether a deviate's influence will be accepted. Waiting until a group
has developed a sense of cohesiveness is most likely to be more
effective, for instance, than jumping in with an unexpected or
unconventional proposal during the group's formative stages.
A Leadership Example
In
early 1980 the brutal Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia had just been
defeated at the end of many years of fighting, and several hundred
thousand Cambodian refugees flooded hastily-constructed camps in eastern
Thailand. Many Americans became concerned about the suffering in
the refugee camps, and a group of 25 graduate students in Vermont
studying international administration nearly played a direct role in the
situation because their program's director was willing to speak out as a
deviate.
The students were seated in a circle one morning,
engaged in a discussion about human service agencies. One of them
noticed that the director of the program, Walter Johnson, had been
silent for some time and asked, "Walter, what do you think?"
Walter
took a deep breath and replied, "I think what we're talking about is
all well and good, but what I'd really like to do is call a colleague of
mine at the U.N. and see if we could help the Cambodian refugees in
those horrible camps in Thailand".
A stunned silence fell over the group. Someone asked, "Are you serious?"
Walter replied, "Yes, I am".
Silence
returned. Finally, one of the students said, "Walter, if you believe
what you're saying, go ahead and talk to your friend".
Walter
left the room and returned in half an hour to say that his U.N.
colleague was willing to investigate humanitarian service options in
Thailand for the students. The challenge, then, was to explore whether
the students themselves would consider performing such service.
For
the next two days, the whole group engaged in difficult, soul-searching
discussions about what it would mean for them to go to Thailand. They
quickly realized that if they made that choice they would have to
abandon their curriculum at the school and might imperil their financial
aid. Some of them would probably have to leave a spouse or children
behind. And they might be putting themselves in danger of disease or
violence. On the other hand, they could potentially be able to act
according to their shared ideal of contributing to world peace in a
personal, direct, and powerful manner.
Ultimately, the group
realized that it was facing an "all or none" question: either every one
of them would have to agree to travel to Thailand, or none of them
should. Walter's role as a constructive deviate in the Vermont group
stimulated it to consider an option - the "go to Thailand option" -
which in turn spurred earnest and productive conflict which most likely
would not otherwise have taken place.
Key Takeaway
- To harness conflict in a positive manner and contribute to the healthy functioning of a group, a leader should play the roles of motivator, delegator, structuralist, and promoter of constructive deviation.
Exercises
-
Think of someone you met in a group whom you would consider to be a
"deviate". On what basis did you make that determination? To what degree
did others in the group share your assessment of the person?
- Do
you share the view that any conflict What examples from your own
experience support your answer? Consider a group that you're currently
part of, imagine a change in its structure which you feel could reduce
its conflict, and share the information with two fellow students.
- All other things being equal, would you prefer to address a conflict by
bringing the parties together or separating them? Explain your reasons
and provide an example which you believe supports them.