There are few things worse than working with someone with whom you have ongoing conflict, whether he be your boss, a coworker, or an employee. The only thing worse, perhaps, is the emotional distress experienced by those with ongoing conflict with a member of their family (e.g. spouse). A strong case can be made that emotional distress is equal to or worse than suffering physical pain. What is the adage; "keep your friends close and your enemies closer"? Few desire to sleep or work with the enemy. Hence, it pays to understand how to eliminate conflict. In business, it is particularly profitable to create a harmonic environment. Still, depending on your perspective, either that of an employee or that of an employer, you have almost assuredly experienced one of the following sentiments, or something similar:
"I can't believe my boss expects me to do that. Yeah...not happenin'."
"They don't pay me enough to do that."
"This is completely unreasonable. It's time to find a new job."
"Why won't he follow instructions? This is not rocket science."
"I'm tired of lip service. They say they will get it done, but never deliver."
"She's poison for the team, always complaining, gossiping, and spreading negativity."
Naturally, these sentiments usually follow some form of change in process, policy, or performance metric that is being introduced. Moreover, the change is almost always born of an opportunity and associated well-intended desire to improve. It is very disconcerting for someone who is genuinely trying to improve his individual, departmental, or overall company performance and puts forth well-planned improvement suggestions to encounter resistance from those empowered to make decisions or the team members responsible for implementation. Though such situations are frustrating, they are rampant in most business cultures. As with all hindrances to business performance, it is incumbent upon management to uncover the root causes and apply strategies for improvement.
The Starting Point
The good news is that the root cause of most of these dissensions is the same; there exists a misalignment of objectives between stakeholders. Sure, one could cite change itself as a commonly disruptive agent in the workplace. However, doing so falls one step shy of isolating the core of the issue. After all, not all change disturbs the peace; few complain when everyone gets an unusual perk. Again, it is not change in and of itself, but the resulting misalignment (or greater misalignment) of stakeholder objectives that needs to be addressed. In fact, whenever change results in evident alignment of stakeholder objectives, it is welcomed - not eschewed. It is safe for management to assume that the presence of a lack of cooperation between any parties interacting in a business relationship is symptomatic of incongruence in their objectives.
Document Stakeholder Objectives
With this stakeholder objective incongruity identified as the root cause of the obstacle to improvement, the next step is for management to identify and document each stakeholder's objectives. This requires candid communication with the stakeholders. Bear in mind, candor is usually only present commensurate to trust. Therefore, management may need to take its time and provide assurances that honest communication will not be met with defensiveness or any sort of backlash. Those outspoken team members who are often otherwise viewed as troublemakers can serve as great catalysts to progress when valued for their courage and candor in communication. Management needs to create a safe environment for everyone to express his genuine objectives. Furthermore, it is imperative that management understands that all people have their own best interests at heart. Going into a meeting expecting team members to be "team players", "company guys", or "yes men" will lead nowhere. On the contrary, management should challenge any apparently altruistic sentiments shared by the team. Such sentiments are not necessarily disingenuous. However, they are certainly not foundational and only exist insofar as they lead to fulfilling the communicant's personal needs. For example, someone who truthfully states that he wants the company to profit can be prompted to further explore why that is important to him. The subsequent revelation will likely be that he values the security provided him by a profitable company, or some other rationale that is not exclusively benevolent. Once stakeholders begin to witness and accept that it is okay to have selfish motives for behavior, they are likely to share their true objectives along with their associated rationale. This will result in the discovery of objectives between two or more stakeholders are in conflict. Then, the process of implementing strategies for objective alignment can begin.
Keeping It Simple
Once again, there is good news; people only have a few core needs upon which all of their objectives hinge. Management may reference Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs or Dr. Stephen Covey's "4L" summary of the same: "...to live, to love, to learn, to leave a legacy." These boil down to peoples needs to provide for their physical and fiscal requirements (i.e. their "daily bread"), their need for enjoyable social interactions, their need to develop and avoid stagnancy, and their need for feeling as though their contributions make a difference and will somehow survive them when they leave. Proactively ensuring the ability for all stakeholders to advance in the pursuit of their needs will at once both mitigate the risk of individual dissension and provide a basis for exploration whenever conflicts arise. Within the context of a business environment, management can usually look no further than how individual performances are measured and tracked, along with how they are remunerated to uncover basic variances in stakeholder objectives. If the head of one department is paid hourly while the head of another is paid based on production efficiency, for example, a conflict will eventually emerge. By merely modifying a pay plan or performance metric to ensure that all parties want the same thing, management will find that conflicts vanish while cooperation abounds.
Let Go of Old-School Tactics
If this sounds overly simplistic, it is likely because many people have experienced organizations purposefully implementing competing interests between stakeholders in the misguided name of motivation. Some managers attempt to drive results through the comparison of performance metrics of those stakeholders who are also expected to cooperate and collaborate to create synergy and value within the business. This old-school thinking is ineffective and merely persists due to the inability of those employing them to see the inherent downside. You cannot have it both ways; people will either work together or compete. Denial of this stems from shortsighted thinking and will leave managers frustrated with their inability to resolve conflicts that act as barriers to progress. However, it should be stated that eliminating all instances of the misalignment of stakeholders' objectives is not an effortless endeavor. It requires thorough examination, communication, concerted effort, time, and a willingness of those involved to accept the requisite changes. Any efforts of management to effect such change without the involvement of all those affected will be in vain. People need to be involved and give feedback into those changes that impact their fundamental needs. Therefore, management is most effective when it seeks out misaligned objectives before they manifest as symptoms such as frustration, lack of cooperation, conflicts, and communication problems. Creating and employing low-effort means of suggesting improvement for all stakeholders and rewarding use of such mechanisms may be the best place to start.
Personal Relationships, Too
Those wishing to avoid the perils of discord at work would do well to practice behaviors and form habits that eliminate the same while at home. Reflect on ways in which you can effectively implement the objective alignment strategies described above with your loved ones, as well. By way of review, you need to first recognize that conflict arises primarily (perhaps exclusively) as the result of misaligned objectives. Next, you must understand that everyone is essentially looking out for his own best interest and that there are only a few categories into which these fall (out of which all objectives stem). Create a safe, trusting, non-judgmental and non-defensive environment in which the family can candidly discuss its objectives and needs. Finally, seek ways in which you can align objectives. This may involve compromise. It certainly will require patience and empathy. Avoid rigidity regarding definitions and preconceived notions of success or happiness, favoring instead foundational exploration of what matters most. Just as in business, that which is measured and tracked in your personal life will improve. Despite a history of chronic conflict, someone who merely has a different notion of how he can attain his objectives does not make him an enemy. Recognition of this will go a long way to reclassify enemies as those in greater need of understanding. Redifing your terms will ensure you neither sleep nor work with the enemy.
Do you have similar experiences in your organization or in your workplace? What steps have you taken to deal with these types of challenges? We want to hear about it! Share your thoughts in the comments section below!