Now that you have the necessary skills - managing your emotions, empathy and assertiveness, active listening and positive communication - you're ready to face and resolve the conflict!
Map the conflict
When you first look into a conflict, rely on discreet observation and informal exchanges.
Use the techniques of active listening (listening, restating, questioning), empathy (value system, emotional profiles), and positive communication (clarity, vocabulary, sentence turns, verbal/nonverbal congruence) presented in the previous chapters.
Double-check assumptions and gossip; don't generalize, project your own mental model, or interpret: stick to the facts and nothing but the facts!
Make four lists
The signs and consequences of the conflict: asking the questions “who, what, when, where, how, for how long?”
An assessment of the risk factors for the parties involved (Maslow's needs not being met).
A list of causes: distinguish between probable causes (stated or known) and the possible causes (unstated).
Each party's values: you may have some assumptions you can test by asking questions (“What's more important to you? What do you think about computer-related issues causing employees to have to work overtime?").
If you are directly involved in the conflict, you should still make lists. They will be first-hand accounts! :) If it's still possible to talk with the other party, really try to understand their point of view by having a chat.
If you are not directly involved, and if there are too many unknowns, ask each of the parties for a one-on-one meeting. Let them know that you are trying to understand the conflict and want to resolve it.
Case 1: At the luxury shoe brand, Fiona, makes her lists, identifies the technical causes, as well as the unmet needs and differences in value systems. She notes that she prioritizes "safety” first, and "recognition" second. She believes that Oliver's anger over not getting his bonus comes from "survival" rather than "recognition" or “fulfillment.”
Case 2: At the start-up company, project leader Abigail uses a casual setting to skillfully question Chloe and one of her colleagues. Abigail realizes that their value systems are very different. She stops using irony and tries to moderate her personal opinions.
Decide when to act
When should you act? You know that the situation shouldn't be left too long or it will rot, but you don't want to intervene too early either: the conflict must be ripe for resolution.
Consider each party and decide if they are ready for an intervention based on three criteria (model by Zartman and Kubler-Ross):
The feeling of being at an impasse.
Belief in a resolution.
Stage of grief. Psychologists believe that mourning comes in five successive stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. Conflicts can also require people to mourn a loss, such as losing face, a task, project, collaboration, being dismissed, a bad performance, etc.
Conflict | Unripe | Almost ripe | Ripe | Very ripe | Stagnation |
Feeling of being at an impasse | When parties have no real perception of the conflict, or its consequences | When parties are aware of the consequences and the cost of conflict (well-being, performance) | When parties feel they are stuck with no apparent way out | The feeling of impasse becomes unbearable | Parties in the conflict “dig in,” the rest of the team chooses sides, etc. |
Belief in a resolution | Nobody is waiting for resolution | Everyone wants a resolution in their favor | Everyone is ready for a resolution through compromise | Parties hope for resolution even if they would lose | No one believes in resolution any longer |
Stages of professional grief | Denial and then anger | Bargaining | Depression | Acceptance | Resignation and resentment |
You can attempt to resolve a conflict when the parties involved are ready on all three criteria (may not occur at once).
Case 1: Fiona is regularly confronted by aggressive operational staff. When she receives the angry phone call from Oliver, she realizes the conflict is at the crisis stage (stage 2). She also understands that Olivier is at the almost ripe to the ripe stage. She no longer sees the incident as one of rudeness but as organizational conflict.
Case 2: After the lunch where Abigail's remarks hurt Chloe, the latter grew distant and cold. Chloe didn't show any outward signs because the conflict was weak. Even the exchanges in the bathroom and later when Abigail said, "I always knew that you were private,” did not lead them to seek resolution. For the moment, they risk permanent antipathy. If Abigail wants to change, she can investigate discreetly, and move on to the next step.
Let's recap!
You must first map the conflict, which means gathering four types of information using the methods presented in Part 1 of this course as well as through more or less formal questioning:
The consequences observed.
The causes of the conflict.
Value systems.
Risk factors.
Possible solutions begin to come into focus.
Decide when to act. The conflict is ripe when the parties:
Have are aware of the impasse.
Maintain hope for a resolution.
Have gone through some material or symbolic form of grief.
Finally, the conflict can only be resolved long-term when both parties come together for a conversation. This is the topic of the next chapter. :)
