Article #1:

5 Ways Executives Can Manage Conflict with the Board

Foster a healthy dialogue by taking these steps early and often.
by Sabina Nawaz

In a world rife with conflict, few of us want to engage in more. But some situations come
packaged with contention no matter how averse we are to it. CEOs and their executive teams
tackle fraught situations daily. Routine internal pressures have been exacerbated by recent
macroeconomic scarcity, global conflict, and technological disruption, among other
complications. Ideally, executives don’t have to face these challenges alone. They have the
support of their boards of directors. But the high stakes, the strong wills and personalities of
successful, high-powered people, and the heaps of uncertainty ensure that challenges at this
level are accompanied by interpersonal conflict. The backing of a board can help mobilize an
organization to achieve its most ambitious aspirations, but a significant divergence of vision and
values may lead the board to stall progress on an organization’s highest priorities — and even
unseat a [Link] contentions impact direction, strategy, and morale organization-wide,
it’s important to learn how to navigate conflict with the board. Leaders must proactively and
productively make covert disagreements overt and foster a healthy dialog. Otherwise, they may
fall victim to decisions made outside the room and behind our [Link] are five strategies for
navigating conflict with your board. Organizations take their cue on conflict from the CEO. Are
you comfortable raising tough topics? Are you open to differing perspectives? As a group, will
your board feel comfortable challenging you and supporting you? Will they ask provocative
questions you may have avoided facing? Are you then able to have productive conversations?
When Yaniv, an executive client of mine, replaced the founding CEO of a rapidly growing billion-
dollar services firm, he first decided to establish the tone for his board interactions. He didn’t
create a formal list of norms — the kind that elicits head nods around the table only to be
forgotten when real disagreements surface. Instead, Yaniv modeled the behavior he wanted. At
the first board meeting, he named all the concerns that he’d heard of in one-off conversations
with his executive team and some board members. For example, the board was uncertain
whether the company could continue its rapid growth. Some were worried about Yaniv’s youth.
Three of the seasoned executives he now managed had coveted the CEO role. If they were to
leave, they might take valuable lieutenants with [Link] stating these and other issues, Yaniv
invited his board to add to them. A couple more topics were added. Collectively, they prioritized
how to address these [Link] naming these smoldering concerns helped extinguish
potential conflict rather than fuel it. Yaniv further forwarded the tough conversations by asking,
“What do we agree on?” “What do we disagree on?” “If we were successful in addressing this,
who would stand to lose something? “What’s the last 10% you haven’t shared?”Maintaining the
“temperature” for tough conversations with the board allows you to tackle a potential conflict
before it becomes destructive. It increases the board’s confidence that you know what’s going
on and allows them to provide you with early helpful feedback. With any conflict it’s best to
inform all parties of the full situation and its status early and often. This is especially true with
boards because the stakes are high, and it’s possible the board might get concerned or act
without your knowledge if things get [Link] a problem have the potential to become bigger
and more conflict-ridden in the future? If so, share now, so the board is not surprised later or
informed first by someone else. Generate a list of questions that your toughest critics might ask
to anticipate the types of concerns that might be raised. If an issue has occurred to you and is
critical to the business, raise it. When I work with executives, I counsel them to raise possible
objections at the beginning of their presentation, so others more easily get on board, knowing
their concerns are already being considered. Unless there’s a clear breach of ethics, conflict
with the board is rarely binary or unanimous. If there are rumblings of dissension about a recent
decision you made, a lack of confidence in someone on your team whom you endorse, or
concerns about low employee morale in the recent employee survey, for example, identify the
sources of discontent. Understand who has concerns, who is neutral, who has an opposing
viewpoint, and who agrees with you. Instead of taking on the board wholesale on sensitive
topics, work with individuals first: seek allies, and lean into dissenters, despite the inclination to
avoid [Link], the CEO of a retail chain, first learned of a concern about product strategy
through veiled questions during a board meeting. She knew something didn’t feel right, but
instead of calling out the tension in the meeting, she spoke afterward to five board members
separately. In those private conversations she learned that a couple of members were
concerned about a competitive threat and were not only vocal in sharing their concerns, but also
quite dire in their predictions. Anahita called these individuals directly to identify the source of
their worry. She learned new data, but also shared information she had that was unknown to the
board members. Because board members were unaware of measures the company was
already taking to stay ahead of the issue, she was able to defuse additional concerns. At the
next board meeting, Anahita thanked the two members who’d raised concerns, shared the facts
to address them, and asked, “What else do you know that I don’t know? What would our critics
say? What can we learn from that?”By identifying and engaging with individual viewpoints,
you’re able to both fully understand each perspective while avoiding blowing up an issue
beyond proportion. You also demonstrate courage and confidence when you approach
dissenters directly and with [Link] must keep a long and broad view in mind. If the
board is reactive to a short-term crisis (the economic landscape, for example), ensure you also
bring in the long view. Reframing or enlarging the frame of a challenge to include the broader
competitive landscape or the customer perspective can sometimes completely change the
solutions we implement. We might react to a short-term challenge with a big move that could
have long-term consequences. The benefits of immediate, drastic action are clear in the heat of
the moment but what about the cost of carrying this decision a year from now?When faced with
short-term discussions or immediate crises where the board is feeling the urge to take quick
action, ask them broad questions to realign their focus on the long term. For instance, a year
from now, what will we regret more? How do we balance the finances with the product strategy
to survive the short term and thrive in the long term? You’re concerned about the impact on
budget, what about the impact on PR or the customer? The pitched battle of many conflicts is
about choice A vs. choice B. Each faction passionately advocates and re-advocates the benefits
of their preference while the other party becomes further entrenched in their own and opposite
[Link], many fractious situations are more of an “and” instead of an “or.” Author
Barry Johnson calls these “polarities,” two interdependent opposites where both are essential
over time to have a healthy, functioning system. Should we focus on the short term or the long
term? How about quality or cost? Process or innovation? The answer is yes! Despite this, we
expend energy debating and swinging wildly between choice A and B until each becomes
[Link] next time you’re ready to pitch a battle for your side of an either-or false
dichotomy, ask yourself, “I know my side is necessary, but if we only pivot to this side, what are
the downsides?” Have each faction temporarily take the other party’s side. Faction A should
consider the benefits of option B and the pitfalls of option A, and vice versa. Soon it becomes
evident that both options have downsides and upsides, and both options may be necessary.
Therefore, as Johnson says, instead of arguing for one over the other, align on how to maximize
the upsides and minimize the downsides of [Link] pressure and power meet in the types of
topics usually discussed between a board and the CEO, one way to keep your footing is to
name the pressures, set the tone, and then connect not just with those who echo your thoughts
but with everyone else around the table too.

Article #2:
Conflict-competent leadership.
Published in:Phi Delta Kappan, Dec2023/Jan2024, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
By:Feirsen, Robert;Weitzman, Seth

Section:
PREPARING SCHOOL AND DISTRICT LEADERS

Disagreement is inevitable. How can school leaders use it to bring about positive
change?

Even though many want to believe that schools follow the motto of the Three
Musketeers — "All for one, and one for all" — that level of camaraderie is often elusive.
Indeed, dispute is common among every combination of relationships in a school
community: parents vs. teachers, teachers vs. teachers, teachers vs. building
administrators, building administrators vs. central office, and central office vs. school
boards. On top of that, the tensions of these polarized times are reaching into schools,
leaving education leaders caught between opposing points of view regarding such
issues as standardized testing, racial and economic inequity, and appropriate topics for
school curricula.

For all of these reasons, conflict management is one of the most stressful and
frustrating bullet points in a school leader's job description, yet the subject is rarely
examined in graduate-level leadership preparation programs or in-service professional
development. Studies have found leaders spend 20-40% of the workday careening from
one conflict to the next (Chan, Huang, & Ng, 2007; Johnson, 2003). As longtime
building and central office administrators, we found that dealing with conflict was a
recurring theme when our colleagues shared complaints about the job. It's not what
school leaders signed up for, and they were never taught the necessary conflict
resolution skills.

Conflict can result in unsustainable levels of stress, a palpably toxic work environment,
and knee-jerk resistance to change. We believe these factors have contributed to an
exodus of school principals (Superville, 2023) and superintendents (Morton & Valley,
2022; White, Evans, & Malin, 2023). A recent RAND Corporation research report found
16% of U.S. principals retired or resigned in 2021-22, more than double the rate of the
previous year (DiLiberti & Schwartz, 2023). According to the study, the attrition rate is
attributable to "high levels of job-related stress" (p. 10). Superintendents do not fare
much better. RAND calculated that the superintendent attrition rate the same year was
14% (DiLiberti & Schwartz, 2022). In a letter to the editor published in Education Week,
a principal succinctly captured the feeling: "We're not OK" (Meade, 2022).

Without adequate preparation, leaders who do decide to stay often adopt either an
aggressive or avoidant response to dissension. Aggressive leaders manipulate
institutional rewards and punishments (e.g., withholding or bestowing preferential
teaching assignments and schedules; unfairly conferring superior employee
evaluations) to coerce compliance with their favored goals. Avoidant leaders might refer
thorny questions to committees that seem to endlessly meet with no useful conclusion.
Or they might address only "low-hanging fruit," restricting solutions to the most
inconsequential and underwhelming options. A classic example is the school that
decided a bulletin board and assembly for Black History Month was sufficient for
addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion.

When leaders feel unequipped to manage deep discord, they may avoid intervening in
consequential issues, such as racial and income inequities. Amanda E. Lewis and John
B. Diamond (2015) chronicled this phenomenon in a case study of a Chicago-area high
school. In one interview after another, students, parents, teachers, school and district
leaders, and the board of education recognized the prevalence of egregious racial and
income disparities in some of their programs, but they feared the disruptive dissent that
would follow if they took action. So they chose the path of least resistance.

The need for conflict-resolution training

In our presentations to education leaders at state and national conferences, we

regularly ask whether participants ever attended a class or a workshop on conflict
resolution. The response is invariably all hands down. And yet the fields of business,
organizational psychology, and peace studies offer a wealth of knowledge on how to
manage conflict. In fact, contrary to the misplaced conception of dissent as a sign of
failure, the literature depicts conflict as normal and potentially beneficial. When school
leaders skillfully address conflict, positive outcomes include a deeper understanding of
complex issues, growth of collaborative problem-solving skills, a renewed school culture
more accommodating of change, and a healthier and less stressful work environment.

Dispute doesn't need to be disastrous if prospective and practicing school leaders learn
to embed constructive conflict-resolution practices in their school culture. Just as regular
exercise tones arm and leg muscles, regularly practicing "conflict-agility" skills
conditions school leaders to leverage conflict as a means to school improvement.

The following conflict-resolution skills can be important additions to leadership

certification programs and professional development for practicing administrators. Some
of these are habits of mind concerning the way we think about conflict and our reaction
to it. Others are institutional structures that facilitate a positive response to conflict.

Keep calm and principal on

The union president rises at a high school faculty meeting to protest "do-nothing"
administrators allowing chaos to rein in the hallways. Scanning her inbox, another
principal notices the fifth similarly worded email of the day from a parent complaining,
"My 3rd-grade child still hasn't learned to punctuate a sentence." Both school leaders
feel levels of adrenaline and cortisol, the stress hormones, elevating in their
bloodstreams. Their bodies involuntarily assume "fight or flight" mode, a useful
physiological state when encountering a grizzly bear in the wild, but unproductive when
it causes school leaders to react with aggression or avoidance.

Conflict-management literature suggests that a constructive first response is to "slow

down and cool down" (Runde & Flanagan, 2010). Taking a figurative step back and
inhaling a deep breath or silently repeating a personal mantra are effective strategies to
arrest the stress. When facing a contentious comment in person, we routinely buy
ourselves a moment to collect our thoughts by responding with a statement such as,
"That's interesting," followed by a neutral question (e.g., "That's interesting. Can you tell
us more about that?") Initially clearing the mind of anger and angst by briefly pausing
enables leaders to come up with a more reasonable and helpful reaction.

Accept disagreement as normal. Don't take it personally.

The misconstrued idyll of a conflict-free organization gives rise to misleading

expectations and a fraught relationship with dissent. But conflict is, in fact, inevitable in
schools. People's values vary, stakeholders must vie for a school's limited resources,
education has no universal standard of care, parents and teachers both have cause to
believe they know what's best for a child, and change inevitably brings resistance. A
wise colleague once remarked, "Show me a principal beloved by all, and I'll show you a
principal who hasn't attempted anything difficult."

Conflict is normal and not actually the problem. Difficulty arises when the reaction to
conflict is unhealthy. This often begins with the tendency to take the backlash
personally. If a union president is being critical at a faculty meeting or a parent is
complaining about the 3rd-grade writing curriculum, the danger is to adopt an "us vs.
them" mentality and attack these critics' personalities, competence, and motives. Such
antipathy becomes a pattern and leads to a toxic environment. After taking a moment to
calm down, the leader's role should be to direct conversation toward systemic issues
(e.g., school climate, the writing curriculum) and away from counterproductive, self-
serving personal attacks (e.g., they're acting out of ulterior motives).
An effective leader should be ready to act as a referee, blowing a proverbial whistle if
play digresses from the field of productive ideas. Ideas under discussion may be
controversial, but they're impersonal and less provocative for a group to examine and
debate than the motives and actions of specific people or groups. Ideally, wide and
deep exploration of ideas leads to an appraisal of systems at the root of a problem. For
example, when the union president complains that children are running rampant in the
hallways, it's not helpful to lobby back-and-forth charges that either administrators or
teachers are to blame because they're absent from the hallways. Instead, leaders can
redirect meaningful conversation to systems: What is prompting the behavior? To what
extent do students feel engaged in the school community? How can we impart
exemplary behavior?

Identify assumptions. Engage in inquiry.

A critical function of leadership in times of conflict is to recognize presuppositions. It's

normal for people to try to oversimplify a manifestly complex world, but doing so can
lead to misleading thought patterns, called cognitive biases, that limit people's ability to
solve problems underlying conflict. For example, people might limit their options to only
two alternatives, neglecting the range of possible solutions, an example of cognitive
bias called "false choice." We see this in the assumption that the response to
misbehavior must be either swift and sure punishment or permissive acceptance. In
confirmation bias, people seek evidence to affirm their original hypothesis, ignoring
information to the contrary. This would show up when a parent sees every punctuation
mistake in their child's work as a sign of neglected skills, even if objective measurement
shows their child's performance is around average for their grade level.

An inquiry approach can help leaders avoid these biases and better understand the
issues underlying disputes. Inquiry involves collecting data and examining it for a
deeper meaning. Relevant data should include stories, artifacts, and observations from
people who are directly impacted, as well as data from more traditional sources, such
as objective measures and professional literature (Dugan & Safir, 2021). It can help if
leaders pose questions that prompt sustained analysis, such as, "Where and why are
we stuck?" Another option is the Five Whys protocol, which involves repeatedly asking
"why" until the deeper issues are unveiled, a process metaphorically compared to
peeling back an onion.

Expand opportunities for collaborative problem solving. As groups flex their "conflict
agility" muscles, they become more adept practitioners of collaborative problem solving.
Building structures and protocols can help groups build these muscles together. When
he was a school leader, Seth regularly began the first 10 minutes of faculty meetings
with a protocol called "For Good of the Community." Faculty members could share a
community problem, then brainstorm solutions with the group on the spot. As faculty
gain experience with the process, they develop confidence and trust in their collective
ability to address increasingly complex and thorny issues.

Without structures in place that allow groups to frequently apply conflict-resolution

principles and strategies, it's difficult to imagine how a faculty can develop conflict
competence. Aggression and avoidance in response to disputes may occur simply
because the school community hasn't gained enough experience working through
differences and its leaders haven't had the opportunity to facilitate working through
conflict.

To advance from conflict to collaboration, an array of well-structured committees

charged with exploring vital school community issues is an essential leadership
structure. As an example, in schools we led, search committees consisting of parents,
teachers, and administrators convened to recommend finalists to fill faculty vacancies.
As they reviewed application materials, selected promising candidates, drafted interview
questions, conducted interviews, and observed demonstration lessons, they engaged in
intense conversations about the characteristics of effective teaching and the school's
short- and long-range hiring needs. Meanwhile, a sense of camaraderie and shared
understanding grew, smoothing the path the next time a potentially contentious
controversy arose. Another committee to revise the student code of conduct dissected
the issue of restorative justice versus swift and sure behavioral consequences. Their
12-person conference table became a safe space to discuss a multifaceted controversy
about which participants held strong emotions and to nurture consensus under the
guidance of administrators who'd adopted the conflict-competent habits of mind
discussed above.

Don't forget to follow up.

An agreement, once reached, is not guaranteed to last. As Yankee catcher Yogi Berra
observed, "It ain't over 'til it's over." Decision-making processes in schools typically end
prematurely, without adequate follow-up.

In design thinking, implementing a prototype solution is followed by assessment of the

outcome to determine whether modifications are indicated. In our decades in school
administration, we've seen that this step is routinely neglected. Generally, once a
committee launches a new practice or policy, the group disbands, leaving the possibility
that their chosen solution won't work as expected. A design thinking protocol calls for
the committee to create criteria for evaluating their solution and to meet periodically to
analyze results and adjust as needed.

These strategies can also be used in parent-teacher conferences. As groups meet to

address a child's lagging academic performance, maladaptive behavior, and other
emotionally laden subjects, parents often leave the meetings harboring uncertainty or
misgivings. If the strategies suggested in the conferences do not work and there is no
feedback loop, these feelings of uncertainty can harden into antipathy. Suggesting,
"Let's check back in a week or two" at the end of a contentious conference can be
reassuring.

Whether dealing with faculty or families, leaders should also take time to follow up on
the decision-making process itself by asking questions like these: How did you feel
about our meetings? Did you feel your voice was heard? To what extent were you
satisfied with the outcomes? What could I have done better to facilitate the group?
These questions help leaders learn how they can more positively address conflict, and
they communicate to the group that the leader values collaboration. It's possible to pose
these questions in an exit ticket or survey format, but we recommend face-to-face
conversation to further enhance group dynamics through potentially difficult
conversations.

Preparing leaders for conflict

We strongly advocate incorporating the above skills and strategies in preservice

leadership preparation and ongoing professional development for building and district
administrators. Leaders need opportunities to explore literature on conflict resolution
and engage in exercises that provide practical, applied experience.

Teams of aspiring and practicing leaders can use realistic simulations to become more
adept at addressing conflict. A scenario might be a school board proposing annual
parent evaluations of teachers against vehement staff objections. Half the group
participating in the exercise might role-play the perspectives of diverse stakeholders,
while the other half closely observes and takes notes. Follow-up discussion would
examine the dynamics of the conflict. What were the underlying issues, and what
questions did the leader ask to surface them? Was participation widespread and
fulfilling? What was the tenor of group discussion, and were there inflection points when
the tenor shifted? Was the information shared during the discussion likely to produce a
wide and deep appreciation of the issue?

Conflict is one of the most vexing and stressful facets of an administrator's job, but a
new outlook on conflict can transform both the school leader and the prevailing school
culture. In an adversarial environment, resistance to change is almost automatic. But as
school leaders develop expertise in conflict management, they learn to perceive
disagreement as a pathway to improvement rather than an obstacle. Collaborative
problem solving becomes "the way we do things" and the culture is ready to embrace
the challenge of change.

Course material:
Introduction
For many people, conflict can be a word with negative connotations. Within an organization,
employees may equate conflict to open hostility or harsh, interpersonal clashes. However,
conflict is merely a state of unresolved differences between entities. Sometimes, the difference
is functionally productive; sometimes, it is dysfunctional. This unit explores conflict within
organizations and discusses communication techniques that can help to effectively manage
conflict.

Consequences of Conflict

In Managing Conflict in Organizations, M. Afzalur Rahim (2000) explains that conflict has the
potential for both positive and negative consequences. In order to achieve the benefits from
conflict, an organization must mitigate the negative or dysfunctional outcomes of conflict and
develop the positive effects to their highest potential. Rahim (2000) lists seven categories for
both functional outcomes and dysfunctional outcomes that have been studied extensively by a
variety of authors. The functional outcomes have been provided below (Rahim, 2000, p. 7):

Managing Conflict in an OrganizationThrough Communication

Rahim’s Functional Outcomes

1. Conflict may stimulate innovation, creativity, and growth.
2. Organizational decision-making may be improved.
3. Alternative solutions to a problem may be found.
4. Conflict may lead to synergistic solutions to common problems.
5. Individual and group performances may be enhanced.
6. Individuals and groups may be forced to search for new approaches.
7. Individuals and groups may be required to articulate and clarify their positions.

In their groundbreaking study, Scientists in Organizations, Donald Pelz and Frank Andrews
(1976) concluded that a certain amount of creative tension had to exist between the states of
worker security and conflict to stimulate innovation, creativity, and growth. They noted that
employee productivity increased when the organizations they studied changed established
patterns or when technical disputes arose. During these times of conflict, communication
between employees and between management and employees increased.

Pelz and Andrews (1976) also noted that output improved when management provided positive
reinforcement and encouraged employees to participate in policy-making. Positive
communication between management and employees helped to promote the functional
outcome.

After T. J. Peters and R. H. Waterman reviewed the practices of companies like IBM, 3M, GE,
Boeing, and Hewlett Packard, they found that the companies used management practices that
were designed to stimulate competition. Many of the organizations created a contest
atmosphere by assigning the same problem to two different teams. This manufactured conflict
allowed managers to see who would come up with the best solution (Denton, 2002).

A degree of serendipity can develop from conflict. The conversations generated because of the
disagreement can lead to alternative solutions by [Link] conflict occurs between
employees working on a project, managers should encourage a dialogue to exchange
information regarding the issues. During this information exchange, employees will need to
explain their differences in perspective. Without the conflict, this exchange might never happen.
Employees will be forced to reevaluate project goals and problems, which can lead to better
solutions.

When conflict arises, the organization simply cannot follow the status quo—the established way
of doing things—and the need to resolve the conflict can force organizations to try new
approaches. This encourages communication, which can trigger creative solutions for problems
and encourage new ways to achieve goals.

Conflict can have a direct impact on communication. It can force employees to explain their
perspectives and to seek information from coworkers on an issue. Employees will need to
explain their differences in perspectives, which might not happen otherwise (Rahim, 2000, p. 7).

Rahim’s (2000) dysfunctional outcomes have been provided below (p. 7):

Rahim’s Dysfunctional Outcomes

1. Conflicts may cause job stress, burnout, and dissatisfaction.
2. Communication between individuals and groups may be reduced.
3. A climate of distrust and suspicion can be developed.
4. Relationships may be damaged.
5. Job performance may be reduced.
6. Resistance to change can increase.
7. Organizational commitment and loyalty may be affected.

Too much conflict burdens and overwhelms the minds/emotions of the employees, shutting off
the capacity for creativity. For example, the University of Wisconsin-Madison conducted a study
that evaluated elements of job stress, burnout, and dissatisfaction for middle managers in
organizations that were experiencing organizational changes (Antonioni, 1995). The survey also
assessed how the organizations used conflict management to resolve the stressors faced by the
employees. Organizations that had regular communication regarding the conflict management
had employees with lower levels of stress. Organizations that employed individuals who had
concerns about discussing situations with their superiors had employees with higher levels of
stress. The study demonstrates that knowing how to manage and resolve conflict is a valuable
skill to combat workplace stressors. As Antonioni (1995) suggests, successfully managing
stressful work situations to help avoid burnout and job dissatisfaction boils down to mastering
communication [Link], different conversational styles or faulty inferences create
apparent conflicts when no real disagreement exists. Efficiently managing conflict involves
matching the style of communication with the situation (Rahim, 2000). Managers need to
analyze their audience before addressing any type of conflict and to recognize not only the
personal feelings of the employees but also the policies and procedures of the organization. As
Antonioni (1995) relates, communication has to work both ways: Active listening must be a part
of the communication process. All of the concerned parties must claim responsibility for their
actions and collaborate to find a solution that is satisfactory to both sides.

Unacknowledged conflicts rarely go away; rather, they fester and make subsequent exchanges
more difficult. In “How to Diagnose and Treat Poor Performance,” Victoria Bain (2000) explains
that teamwork is undermined by derogatory attitudes. Employees do not function at a high level
of effort when they are cast into stereotypes or oppressed by bias (Bain, 2000).

Conflict is difficult to resolve when an employee criticizes another person instead of focusing on
the issue. This leads to counterattacks and an escalation of the conflict. The issue becomes
more difficult to resolve because feelings are hurt.

Bain (2000) recommends that managers take an active role in resolving the conflict rather than
letting the employees work it out amongst themselves. The author recommends gathering
specific information about complaints rather than general information. This makes it easier for
the employees to address the problem. Bain discusses an example from a chemical plant where
an employee did not feel valued by his manager and intentionally reduced the amount of work
he did on a daily basis. The manager did value the employee but never communicated this to
him. The conflict developed due to this lack of communication and was resolved only when a
dialogue between the two [Link] need to review systems and/or procedures for
changes that may have caused the conflict. People who have already made up their minds
about a situation are highly resistant to change. The structure of a work group in an organization
may have altered, new technology may have been introduced, or resources that once were
plentiful may now be scarce (Bain, 2000).

In order to overcome the opposition, it is important to send an unambiguous message: People

who are embroiled in conflict can misread topics that neutral parties may consider clear. It also
can help to start a message with an area of agreement or common ground.

Often, conflict arises because an employee does not feel respected or appreciated by the other
members of the organization. Bain (2000) considers it a manager’s responsibility to determine
root causes and develop solutions.

Antonioni (1995) describes the following situation that shows how a project manager phrases a
request may make a great deal of difference. If the manager states that he or she wants the
employee to attend meetings because he or she values the employee’s input, this is a positive
way
to phrase the request. If the manager states that he or she wants the employee to attend
meetings
because it is a corporate policy, this is a negative way to make the request.
In this example, the conflict could arise because the statement “you need to be at the meeting
because that is our policy” does not reflect the reality of the situation. Attendance may indeed
be
a policy of the organization, but the desired outcome of that policy is the important input of the
employee. If this is not communicated, conflict can arise.

Communication Techniques

In “Practicing Conflict Management Can Help Reduce Organizational Stress,” Antonioni (1995)
discusses four communication techniques that can help effectively manage conflict in
organizations.
These techniques can both promote functional conflict and resolve dysfunctional conflict.
• Assertive communication: Each individual in a conversation needs to stand up for his or her
rights, needs, and expectations while also being attentive to the same attributes for the other
person (Antonioni, 1995). It is helpful to determine what is at stake and who will be affected by
the decisions. The message will be most effective if it considers the entire organizational context
as well as the larger context of shareholders, customers, and so forth.
• Active listening: Active listening is critical for developing a shared understanding of a
problem (Antonioni, 1995). Often, individuals do not listen attentively when another person
speaks.
The listeners may be distracted or, during a conflict, may be trying to formulate a response to
win
the argument. In active listening, listeners (receivers) demonstrate that they have understood a
speaker through feedback. Receivers can paraphrase the content, mirror the speaker’s feelings,
ask
for clarification, or request additional information.
• Problem solving: Defining the problem and identifying the causes are essential aspects of
helping to manage conflict through communication.
• Negotiation: Generate as many options or alternatives as possible before deciding on a
solution.

In all but the very simplest problems, there are several possible solutions. Antonioni (1995)
believes that both parties need to utilize effective negotiation skills. Focus on seeing the issues
from the other party’s perspective, he recommends, rather than negotiating solely from a fixed
individual position.

Conclusion
As Rahim (2000) notes, it is impossible to eliminate all conflict from an organization. He believes
that a moderate amount of conflict is beneficial for an organization and is even necessary for
maintaining effectiveness. What remains central to both the functional and dysfunctional results
of conflict is communication.

Through communication, the participants establish what the conflict means and the way that it
affects the organization. In the functional examples, conflict led to greater communication
among the participants. In the dysfunctional examples, employees and/or managers did not
communicate effectively, and the conflict was resolved only through increased levels of
communication between the participants.