Conflict Management

What is on this page?

1. What do organisations use conflict management for?
2. Important things to know about "conflict" and "conflict management"
3. How to identify signs and stages of conflict
4. How to build teamwork and co-operation (and so minimise the
possibility of conflict)
5. How to manage and resole conflict situations
6. !utline for a "ediation #ractice $ession
7. Mediation Guideline: Code of Conduct for Participants
1. What do organisations use conflict management for?
For any organisation to be effective and efficient in achieving its goals, the people in the
organisation need to have a shared vision of what they are striving to achieve, as well as clear
objectives for each tea ! departent and individual. "ou also need ways of recognising and
resolving conflict aongst people, so that conflict does not becoe so serious that co#operation
is ipossible. $ll ebers of any organisation need to have ways of %eeping conflict to a
iniu # and of solving probles caused by conflict, before conflict becoes a ajor obstacle
to your wor%. &his could happen to any organisation, whether it is an 'G(, a C)(, a political
party, a business or a governent.
Conflict anageent is the process of planning to avoid conflict where possible and organising
to resolve conflict where it does happen, as rapidly and soothly as possible.
2. Important things to know about "conflict" and "conflict management":
he differences between "competition" and "conflict"
*Copetition* usually brings out the best in people, as they strive to be top in their field, whether
in sport, counity affairs, politics or wor%. +n fact, fair and friendly copetition often leads to
new sporting achieveents, scientific inventions or outstanding effort in solving a counity
proble. ,hen copetition becoes unfriendly or bitter, though, conflict can begin # and this
can bring out the worst in people.
Common causes of conflict
Causes or sources of organisational conflict can be any and varied. &he ost coon
causes are the following:
1
scarcity of resources -finance, e.uipent, facilities, etc/
different attitudes, values or perceptions
disagreeents about needs, goals, priorities and interests
poor counication
poor or inade.uate organisational structure
lac% of teawor%
lac% of clarity in roles and responsibilities
Conflict between indi!idual
People have differing styles of counication, abitions, political or religious views and
different cultural bac%grounds. +n our diverse society, the possibility of these differences leading
to conflict between individuals is always there, and we ust be alert to preventing and resolving
situations where conflict arises.
Conflict between groups of people
,henever people for groups, they tend to ephasise the things that a%e their group *better
than* or *different fro* other groups. &his happens in the fields of sport, culture, religion and
the wor%place and can soeties change fro healthy copetition to destructive conflict.
Conflict within a group of people
0ven within one organisation or tea, conflict can arise fro the individual differences or
abitions entioned earlier1 or fro rivalry between sub#groups or factions. $ll leaders and
ebers of the organisation need to be alert to group dynaics that can spill over into conflict.
". #ow to identif$ signs and stages of conflict
"%isputes of right" and "disputes of interest"
0specially in the wor%place, two ain types of disputes have been noted -although these two
types ay also happen in other situations/. &hese are:
*disputes of right*, where people or groups are entitled by law, by contract, by
previous agreeent or by established practice to certain rights. 2isputes of right
will focus on conflict issues such as eployent contracts, legally enforceable
atters or unilateral changes in accepted or custoary practices. $ dispute of
rights is, therefore, usually settled by legal decision or arbitration and not by
negotiation.
*disputes of interest*, where the conflict ay be a atter of opinion, such as
where a person or group is entitled to soe resources or privileges -such as
access to property, better wor%ing conditions, etc/. )ecause there is no
established law or right, a dispute of interest will usually be solved through
collective bargaining or negotiation.
2
&tages of conflict
&he handling of conflict re.uires awareness of its various developental stages. +f leaders in
the situation can identify the conflict issue and how far it has developed, they can soeties
solve it before it becoes uch ore serious. &ypical stages include:
where potential for conflict e3ists # in other words where people recognise that
lac% of resources, diversity of language or culture ay possible result in conflict if
people are not sensitive to the diversity.
latent conflict where a copetitive situation could easily spill over into conflict #
e.g. at a political rally or in the wor%place where there are obvious differences
between groups of people.
open conflict # which can be triggered by an incident and suddenly becoe real
conflict.
afterath conflict # the situation where a particular proble ay have been
resolved but the potential for conflict still e3ists. +n fact the potential ay be even
greater than before, if one person or group perceives itself as being involved in a
win#loose situation.
&igns of conflict between indi!iduals
+n the organisation leaders and ebers should be alert to signs of conflict between
colleagues, so that they can be proactive in reducing or resolving the conflict by getting to the
root of the issue. &ypical signs ay include:
colleagues not spea%ing to each other or ignoring each other
contradicting and bad#outhing one another
deliberately underining or not co#operating with each other, to the downfall of
the tea
&igns of conflict between groups of people
4iilarly, leaders and ebers can identify latent conflict between groups of people in the
organisation or the counity and plan action before the conflict becoes open and
destructive:
cli.ues or factions eeting to discuss issues separately, when they affect the
whole organisation
one group being left out of organising an event which should include everybody
groups using threatening slogans or sybols to show that their group is right and
the others are wrong
'. #ow to build teamwork and co(operation )*and so minimise the possibilit$ of
conflict+
3
&eawor% and co#operation are essential in an organisation which ais to be effective and
efficient, and not li%ely to be divided by conflicting factions. &he best teawor% usually coes
fro having a shared vision or goal, so that leaders and ebers are all coitted to the sae
objectives and understand their roles in achieving those objectives. +portant behaviours in
achieving teawor% and iniising potential conflict include a coitent by tea ebers
to:
share inforation by %eeping people in the group up#to#date with current issues
e3press positive e3pectations about each other
epower each other # publicly crediting colleagues who have perfored well and
encouraging each other to achieve results
tea#build # by prooting good orale and protecting the group5s reputation with
outsiders
resolve potential conflict # by bringing differences of opinion into the open and
facilitating resolution of conflicts
,. #ow to manage and resol!e conflict situations
Collecti!e bargaining
0specially in wor%place situations, it is necessary to have agreed echaniss in place for
groups of people who ay be antagonistic -e.g. anageent and wor%ers/ to collectively
discuss and resolve issues. &his process is often called *collective bargaining*, because
representatives of each group coe together with a andate to wor% out a solution collectively.
03perience has shown that this is far better than avoidance or withdrawal, and puts deocratic
processes in place to achieve *integrative proble solving*, where people or groups who ust
find ways of co#operating in the sae organisation, do so within their own agreed rules and
procedures.
Conciliation
&he dictionary defines conciliation as *the act of procuring good will or inducing a friendly
feeling*. 4outh $frican labour relations legislation provides for the process of conciliation in the
wor%place, whereby groups who are in conflict and who have failed to reach agreeent, can
coe together once again to attept to settle their differences. &his is usually attepted before
the ore serious step of a stri%e by wor%ers or a loc%#out by anageent is ta%en1 and it has
been found useful to involve a facilitator in the conciliation process. 4iilarly, any other
organisation -e.g. sports club, youth group or counity organisation/ could try conciliation as a
first step.
he difference between negotiation- mediation- and arbitration
&hree ethods of resolving situations that have reached the stage of open conflict are often
used by any different organisations. +t is iportant to understand these ethods, so that
people can decide which ethods will wor% best for the in their specific conflict situation:
4
.egotiation: this is the process where andated representatives of groups in a
conflict situation eet together in order to resolve their differences and to reach
agreeent. +t is a deliberate process, conducted by representatives of groups,
designed to reconcile differences and to reach agreeents by consensus. &he
outcoe is often dependent on the power relationship between the groups.
'egotiations often involve coproise # one group ay win one of their
deands and give in on another. +n wor%places 6nions and anageent
representative usually sue negotiations to solve conflicts. Political and counity
groups also often use this ethod.
Mediation: when negotiations fail or get stuc%, parties often call in and
independent ediator. &his person or group will try to facilitate settleent of the
conflict. &he ediator plays an active part in the process, advises both or all
groups, acts as interediary and suggests possible solutions. +n contrast to
arbitration -see below/ ediators act only in an advisory capacity # they have no
decision#a%ing powers and cannot ipose a settleent on the conflicting
parties. 4%illed ediators are able to gain trust and confidence fro the
conflicting groups or individuals.
/rbitration: eans the appointent of an independent person to act as an
adjudicator -or judge/ in a dispute, to decide on the ters of a settleent. )oth
parties in a conflict have to agree about who the arbitrator should be, and that the
decision of the arbitrator will be binding on the all. $rbitration differs fro
ediation and negotiation in that it does not proote the continuation of
collective bargaining: the arbitrator listens to and investigates the deands and
counter#deands and ta%es over the role of decision#a%er. People or
organisations can agree on having either a single arbitrator or a panel of
arbitrators who they respect and whose decision they will accept as final, in
order to resolve the conflict.
#ow to be an effecti!e mediator
$n effective ediator needs certain s%ills in order to achieve credibility and results:
preferably a proven record of success in ediation or negotiation
the ability to gain the trust, acceptance and co#operation of conflicting parties
clear thin%ing in identifying the real probles and offering practical solutions
%nowledgeable about the organisational structures, strategies and attitudes of the
conflicting parties1 as well as any relevant laws or agreeents
tactful and diploatic with the necessary powers of persuasion and strong
character to nudge the participants progressively towards an agreeent.
#ow to run a mediation process
&he ediation process can be broadly divided into the following three stages:
&tage 1: Introduction and establishment of credibilit$
5
2uring the first stage, the ediator plays a passive role. &he ain tas% is to gain the trust and
acceptance of the conflicting parties, so that they begin to believe that he!she will be capable of
assisting the fairly as a person on who they can rely at all ties. $n e3perienced ediator
will leave ost of the tal%ing to the disputing parties, but will listen attentively and as% probing
.uestions to pinpoint the causes of the dispute, obstacles to a possible settleent and to
identify the issues in order of priority. (nce credibility is achieved and sufficient bac%ground
%nowledge gained, the ediator ay begin to persuade the parties to resue negotiations,
possibly with a fresh perspective.
&tage 2: &teering the negotiation process
+n the second stage, the ediator intervenes ore actively in steering the negotiations. 7e!she
ay offer advice to the parties, attept to establish the actual resistance point of each party and
to discover areas in which coproises could be reached. &he ediator will encourage parties
to put forward proposals and counter#proposals and -when a solution appears feasible/ will
begin to urge or even pressurise the participants towards acceptance of a settleent.
&tage ": Mo!ement towards a final settlement
$n e3perienced ediator will %now when to use diploacy and when to e3ert pressure towards
final settleent of the dispute. &iing and sensitivity to personalities and strategic positions is
iportant to aintain credibility and avoid rejection by one or ore parties in the process.
7e!she ight use bi#lateral discussions with individuals or groups and during the final stages
ay actually suggest or draft proposals for consideration. +n the event of a final settleent being
reached, the ediator usually assists the parties in the drafting of their agreeent, ensuring that
both sides are satisfied with the wording, ters and conditions of the agreeent.
&he process of ediation is dynaic and finely#tuned. $ good ediator has to be fle3ible and
inventive, ust ensure that his!her personal values are not iposed on the conflicting parties. $t
ost a ediator can advise, persuade or cajole the towards agreeent.
0. 1utline for a Mediation &ession
&his is a session of at least 8 9 hours. +t is a suggested structure for a foral ediation session
around a conflict between two organisations, parties or groups. "ou should be fle3ible when you
structure a ediation session, e.g. a ore inforal ediation, say between two neighbours, will
need a different approach.
+n this session, reeber that you ay want to be fle3ible with tie, for e3aple to allow for
translation, to allow each side tie to caucus -spea% aong theselves/ or to give the ediator
tie to eet both sides separately.
+t is always a good idea to structure a brea% in the ediation for people to have tea and get
soe fresh air. 4o, to allow for things li%e brea%s, e3tra caucussing and translation, you should
try to set aside about : hours for the ediation session.
;. 1pening of Mediation:
,elcoe
+ntroductions
;<
ins
6
$greeing to the rules and procedures
8. &tatement of 2ositions:
0ach side presents their position -their point of view/
4uarise these positions fro the chair
$llow clarifying .uestions
$llow responses
=>
ins
=. 3inding Common ground:
,hat is each side prepared to do # as% for practical
suggestions, possible solutions, etc
&a%e responses to these suggestions
4uarise coonground and add alternative solutions
fro the chair
-Note: if there is very little common ground at this point,
this might be a good time to speak to both sides
separately/
=>
ins
:. 4eassessing 2ositions:
Give both sides an opportunity to caucus on how they feel
about suggested solutions
;>
ins
<. 4eaching /greement:
$s% each side to briefly restate their position and say what
they fell about the possible solutions
?eview the coon ground and suarise any points of
agreeent fro the chair
0ncourage agreeent on the reaining points
?ecord and read bac% whatever agreeent is reached
=>
ins
@. Closure of Mediation:
Facilitate discussion on the way forward, including the
enforceent, onitoring and publicising of the agreeent,
and the need for future eetings
&han% you5s
;<
ins
1. Mediation 5uideline: Code of Conduct for 2articipants
2uring ediation you need soe rules on how each side should behave, especially if there are
a lot of people involved in the ediation.
&his is a chec%list of rules and procedures which you can get each side to agree on before you
start to run a ediation session. &o save tie, you can get the sides to agree on soe of these
issues before you start the foral edication sessions.
&rust and respect for chairperson -i.e. the ediator/ and the ediating tea -if
ore that one person/
4hould there be translation and who should do itA
+s the venue secure and neutralA
7
2o the chairs and tables have to be re#arrangedA
4iBe and leadership of delegations.
4hould observers be allowedA
$greeing to behave in a polite and disciplined way.
'o blaing, verbal abuse or shouting.
'o physical intiidation -e.g. pointing/ and violence.
'o presence and carrying of weapons.
4hould so%ing, drin%ing and eating be allowedA
'o other distracting behaviour, e.g. caucussing while the other side is spea%ing.
7ow long should sessions beA
0.ual tie for each side to spea% and who should spea% first.
(pportunity to caucus and consult when necessary.
7ow should the ediation be inutedA
,hat parts of the discussion should be confidentialA
7ow should the agreeent be reported bac% to ebersA
4hould the outcoe of the ediation be publicised and howA
How To Swim With Sharks: A Conflict Management Analogy
July 13, 2009 | Author: PM Hut | Filed under: Conflict Manageent, Pro!ect Manageent
Mu"ing"
Ho# $o %#i &ith %har'": A Conflict Manageent Analogy
(y )oltaire Cou"teau
PM Hut chose to publish this article because it offers a great insight on how to deal with
conflict. Although the article, in and for itself, does not mention Project Management, it has
subtle meanings that any Project Manager, whether novice or experienced, can easily relate
to.
Forward
Actually, no*ody #ant" to "#i #ith "har'"+ ,t i" not an ac'no#ledged "-ort and it i" neither
en!oya*le nor e.hilarating+ $he"e in"truction" are #ritten -riarily for the *enefit of tho"e,
#ho, *y /irtue of their occu-ation, find they u"t "#i and find that the #ater i" infe"ted
#ith "har'"+
8
,t i" of o*/iou" i-ortance to learn that the #ater" are "har' infe"ted *efore coencing to
"#i+ ,t i" "afe to "ay that thi" initial deterination ha" already *een ade+ ,f the #ater"
#ere infe"ted, the na0/e "#ier i" *y no# -ro*a*ly *eyond hel-1 at the /ery lea"t, he ha"
dou*tle"" lo"t any intere"t in learning ho# to "#i #ith "har'"+
Finally, "#iing #ith "har'" i" li'e any other "'ill: ,t cannot *e learned fro *oo'" alone1
the no/ice u"t -ractice in order to de/elo- the "'ill+ $he follo#ing rule" "i-ly "et forth the
fundaental -rinci-le" #hich, if follo#ed #ill a'e it -o""i*le to "ur/i/e #hile *ecoing
e.-ert through -ractice+
Rules
1. Assume all unidentified fish are sharks. 2ot all "har'" loo' li'e "har'", and "oe fi"h
that are not "har'" "oetie" act li'e "har'"+ 3nle"" you ha/e #itne""ed docile
*eha/ior in the -re"ence of "hed *lood on ore than one occa"ion, it i" *e"t to a""ue
an un'no#n "-ecie" i" a "har'+ ,ne.-erienced "#ier" ha/e *een *adly angled *y
a""uing that docile *eha/ior in the a*"ence of *lood indicate" that the fi"h i" not a
"har'+
8. Do not bleed. ,t i" a cardinal -rinci-le that if you are in!ured, either *y accident or *y
intent, you u"t not *leed+ 4.-erience "ho#" that *leeding -ro-t" an e/en ore
aggre""i/e attac' and #ill often -ro/o'e the -artici-ation of "har'" that are
unin/ol/ed or, a" noted a*o/e, are u"ually docile+ Adittedly, it i" difficult not to
*leed #hen in!ured+ ,ndeed, at fir"t thi" ay "ee i-o""i*le+ 5iligent -ractice,
ho#e/er, #ill -erit the e.-erienced "#ier to "u"tain a "eriou" laceration #ithout
*leeding and #ithout e/en e.hi*iting any lo"" of co-o"ure+ $hi" heo"tatic reflect
can, in -art, *e conditioned, *ut there ay *e con"titutional a"-ect" a" #ell+ $ho"e
#ho cannot learn to control their *leeding "hould not atte-t to "#i #ith "har'", for
the -eril i" too great+ $he control of *leeding ha" a -o"iti/e -rotecti/e eleent for the
"#ier+ $he "har' #ill *e confu"ed a" to #hether or not hi" attac' ha" in!ured you
and confu"ion i" to the "#ier6" ad/antage+ 7n the other hand, the "har' ay 'no#
he ha" in!ured you and *e -u88led a" to #hy you do not *leed or "ho# di"tre""+ $hi"
al"o ha" a -rofound effect on "har'"+ $hey *egin to 9ue"tion their o#n -otency or,
alternati/ely, *elie/e the "#ier to ha/e "u-ernatural -o#er"+
=. Counter any aggression promptly. %har'" rarely attac' a "#ier #ithout #arning+
3"ually there i" "oe tentati/e, e.-loratory aggre""i/e action+ ,t i" i-ortant that the
"#ier recogni8e that thi" *eha/ior i" a -relude to an attac' and ta'e" -ro-t and
/igorou" reedial action+ $he a--ro-riate countero/e i" a "har- *lo# to the no"e+
Alo"t in/aria*ly thi" #ill -re/ent a full:"cale attac', for it a'e" it clear that you
under"tand the "har'6" intention and are -re-ared to u"e #hate/er force i" nece""ary
to re-el aggre""i/e action"+ %oe "#ier" i"ta'enly *elie/e that an ingratiating
attitude #ill di"-el an attac' under the"e circu"tance"+ $hi" i" not correct1 "uch a
re"-on"e -ro/o'e" a "har' attac'+ $ho"e #ho hold thi" erroneou" /ie# can u"ually *e
identified *y their i""ing li*+
9
:. Get out of the water if someone is bleeding. ,f a "#ier ;or "har'< ha" *een
in!ured and i" *leeding, get out of the #ater -ro-tly+ $he -re"ence of *lood and the
thra"hing of #ater #ill elicit aggre""i/e *eha/ior e/en in the o"t docile of "har'"+
$hi" latter grou-, -oorly "'illed in attac'ing, often *eha/e" irrationally and ay attac'
unin/ol/ed "#ier" and "har'"+ %oe are "o ine-t that, in the confu"ion, they in!ure
the"el/e"+ 2o u"eful -ur-o"e i" "er/ed in atte-ting to re"cue the in!ured "#ier+
He either #ill or #ill not "ur/i/e the attac', and your inter/ention cannot -rotect hi
once *lood ha" *een "hed+ $ho"e #ho "ur/i/e "uch an attac' rarely /enture to "#i
#ith "har'" again, an attitude #hich i" readily under"tanda*le+ $he lac' of effecti/e
counterea"ure" to a fully de/elo-ed "har' attac' e-ha"i8e" the i-ortance of the
earlier rule"+
<. Use anticipatory retaliation. A con"tant danger to the "'illed "#ier i" that the
"har'" #ill forget that he i" "'illed and ay attac' in error+ %oe "har'" ha/e
notoriou"ly -oor eorie" in thi" regard+ $hi" eory lo"" can *e -re/ented *y a
-rogra of antici-atory retaliation+ $he "'illed "#ier "hould engage in the"e
acti/itie" -eriodically and the -eriod" "hould *e le"" than the eory "-an of the
"har'+ $hu", it i" not -o""i*le to "tate fi.ed inter/al"+ $he -rocedure ay need to *e
re-eated fre9uently #ith forgetful "har'" and need *e done only once for "har'" #ith
total recall+ $he -rocedure i" e""entially the "ae a" de"cri*ed under rule 3: a "har-
*lo# to the no"e+ Here, ho#e/er, the *lo# i" une.-ected and "er/e" to reind the
"har' that you are *oth alert and unafraid+ %#ier" "hould care not to in!ure the
"har' and dra# *lood during thi" e.erci"e for t#o rea"on": Fir"t, "har'" often *leed
-rofu"ely, and thi" lead" to the chaotic "ituation de"cri*ed under rule =+ %econd, if
"#ier" act in thi" fa"hion, it ay not *e -o""i*le to di"tingui"h "#ier" fro
"har'"+ ,ndeed, renegade "#ier" are far #or"e than "har'", for none of the rule" or
ea"ure" de"cri*ed here i" effecti/e in controlling their aggre""i/e *eha/ior+
@. Disorganized and organized attack. 3"ually "har'" are "ufficiently "elf:centered that
they do not act in concert again"t a "#ier+ $hi" lac' of organi8ation greatly reduce"
the ri"' of "#iing aong "har'"+ Ho#e/er, u-on occa"ion the "har'" ay launch a
coordinated attac' u-on a "#ier or e/en u-on one of their nu*er+ &hile the
latter e/ent i" of no -articular concern to "#ier, it i" e""ential that one 'no# ho#
to handle an organi8ed "har' attac' directed again"t a "#ier+ $he -ro-er "trategy
i" di/er"ion+ %har'" can *e di/erted fro their organi8ed attac' in one of t#o #ay"+
Fir"t, "har'" a" a grou-, are -rone to internal di""en"ion+ An e.-erienced "#ier can
di/ert an organi8ed attac' *y introducing "oething, often inor or tri/ial, #hich "et"
the "har'" to fighting aong the"el/e"+ 3"ually *y the tie the internal conflict i"
"ettled the "har'" cannot e/en recall #hat they #ere "etting a*out to do, uch le""
get organi8ed to do it+ A "econd echani" of di/er"ion i" to introduce "oething that
"o enrage" the e*er" of the grou- that they *egin to la"h out in all direction", e/en
attac'ing inaniate o*!ect" in their fury+ &hat "hould *e introduced> 3nfortunately,
different thing" -ro-t internal di""en"ion of *lind fury in different grou-" of "har'"+
Here one u"t *e e.-erienced in dealing #ith a gi/en grou- of "har'", for #hat
10
enrage" one grou- #ill -a"" unnoted *y another+ ,t i" "carcely nece""ary to "tate that
it i" unethical for a "#ier under attac' *y a grou- of "har'" to counter the attac'
*y di/erting the to another "#ier+ ,t i", ho#e/er, coon to "ee thi" done *y
no/ice "#ier" and *y "har'" #hen under concerted attac'+
)oltaire Cou"teau ay ha/e *een a de"cendant of Francoi" )oltaire and an ance"tor of
Jac9ue" Cou"teau+ He died in Pari" in 1?12+
Dealing with Conflict
%onflict occurs when indiiduals or groups are not obtaining what they need or want and are seeking their
own self-interest& $ometimes the indiidual is not aware of the need and unconsciously starts to act out&
!ther times' the indiidual is ery aware of what he or she wants and actiely works at achieing the
goal&
About conflict:
%onflict is ineitable(
%onflict deelops because we are dealing with people)s lies' *obs' children' pride' self-concept'
ego and sense of mission or purpose(
+arly indicators of conflict can be recogni,ed(
-here are strategies for resolution that are aailable and .! work(
/lthough ineitable' conflict can be minimi,ed' dierted and0or resoled&
Beginnings of conflict:
#oor communication
$eeking power
.issatisfaction with management style
Weak leadership
1ack of openness
%hange in leadership
Conflict indicators:
2ody language
.isagreements' regardless of issue
Withholding bad news
11
$urprises
$trong public statements
/iring disagreements through media
%onflicts in alue system
.esire for power
Increasing lack of respect
!pen disagreement
1ack of candor on budget problems or other sensitie issues
1ack of clear goals
3o discussion of progress' failure relatie to goals' failure to ealuate the superintendent fairly'
thoroughly or at all&
Conflict is destructive when it:
-akes attention away from other important actiities
4ndermines morale or self-concept
#olari,es people and groups' reducing cooperation
Increases or sharpens difference
1eads to irresponsible and harmful behaior' such as fighting' name-calling
Conflict is constructive when it:
5esults in clarification of important problems and issues
5esults in solutions to problems
Inoles people in resoling issues important to them
%auses authentic communication
Helps release emotion' an6iety' and stress
2uilds cooperation among people through learning more about each other(
*oining in resoling the conflict
Helps indiiduals deelop understanding and skills
Techniques for avoiding and/or resolving (board-superintendent) conflict:
"eet conflict head on
$et goals
12
#lan for and communicate fre7uently
2e honest about concerns
/gree to disagree - understand healthy disagreement would build better decisions
8et indiidual ego out of management style
1et your team create - people will support what they help create
.iscuss differences in alues openly
%ontinually stress the importance of following policy
%ommunicate honestly - aoid playing "gotcha" type games
#roide more data and information than is needed
.eelop a sound management system
Causes of board-superintendent conflict:
How does a school board cause conflict with a superintendent?
-rying to be administrators( oerstepping authority
"aking promises as board members indiidually
Inoling themseles in labor relations or budgetary minutia
3ot doing their "homework" and failing to prepare for meetings
3ot following procedures for handling complaints
3ot keeping e6ecutie session information confidential
9ailing to act on sensitie issues
9ailing to be open and honest with the superintendent
"aking decisions based on preconceied notions
3ot supporting the superintendent - lack of loyalty
$pringing surprises at meetings
Haing hidden agendas
How does a superintendent cause conflict with a school board?
3ot treating board members alike
3ot informing the board members of public concerns
3ot proiding ade7uate financial data or ade7uate information
13
4sing poor public management practices
"aking public statements before informing the board
9ailing to be open and honest with the board
3ot proiding alternaties in an ob*ectie manner
3ot ad*usting to the new reality of an inoled board
3ot support the board - lack of loyalty
$pringing surprises at meetings
Haing hidden agendas
le!ents of a strong board-superintendent partnerships
9ull disclosure
9re7uent two-way communication
%areful planning
Informal interaction
#eriodic ealuation
"utual support
Courageous decision controversies:
-he controersies usually inole:
%hanges in the way "we)e always done things"
3otions of fundamental alues
.etermined' articulate adocates for eery side
Inability to compromise
5ampant rumors
-hreats of retaliation at the polls at the ne6t bond' ley or school
2oard election
"esolving Conflict
$earching for the causes of conflict is essential to be successful in resoling the conflict& 3ine possible
causes of conflict include:
%onflict with self
14
3eeds or wants are not being met
;alues are being tested
#erceptions are being 7uestioned
/ssumptions are being made
<nowledge is minimal
+6pectations are too high0too low
#ersonality' race' or gender differences are present
"eaching Consensus through Collaboration
8roups often collaborate closely in order to reach consensus or agreement& -he ability to use
collaboration re7uires the recognition of and respect for eeryone)s ideas' opinions' and suggestions&
%onsensus re7uires that each participant must agree on the point being discussed before it becomes a part
of the decision& 3ot eery point will meet with eeryone)s complete approal& 4nanimity is not the goal&
-he goal is to hae indiiduals accept a point of iew based on logic& When indiiduals can understand
and accept the logic of a differing point of iew' you must assume you hae reached consensus&
9ollow these guidelines for reaching consensus:
/oid arguing oer indiidual ranking or position& #resent a position as logically as possible&
/oid "win-lose" statements& .iscard the notion that someone must win&
/oid changing of minds only in order to aoid conflict and to achiee harmony&
/oid ma*ority oting' aeraging' bargaining' or coin flipping& -hese do not lead to consensus&
-reat differences of opinion as indicatie of incomplete sharing of releant information' keep
asking 7uestions&
<eep the attitude that holding different iews is both natural and healthy to a group&
;iew initial agreement as suspect& +6plore the reasons underlying apparent agreement and make
sure that members hae willingly agreed&
15