Susan,
I agree that a knee-jerk reaction would be detrimental to any type of resolution. I work with a direct report who happens to be a chronic complainer. As a new member of the admnininstrative team, I would face the potential for early burnout if I reacted to the seemingly daily complaints from this particular staff member. I find that active listening and allowing time for ventilation works well in defusing most of the situations.
AJ
Strategy and oranization can reduce your stress and helps with a logical decision process.
Although each interaction is different, the one thing that has helped me with tough conversations has been being prepared. When at all possible, I try to come up with a written game plan before a difficult meeting, making sure that I have notes and key points to be addressed. During the conversation, I try to let the other individual take us to these areas by using probing type questions. Roll playing the difficult interaction beforehand can also be a big help.
Your approach is a logical move towards resolution to a problem. I think more than waiting is your ability to listen. In most instances people will resolve their issues while someone listens to the problem. Your listening and then collaborating with the person to solve the issue is a good trait by you as a leader.
If there is little or no emotional involvement, then I deal with the situation right then and there by clarifying the other person's intentions because sometimes what I hear, is not what the other person meant by their comments or actions. If anyone I am interacting with appears to be upset, I give it a little more time, and then approach the subject at a later date so that we both have time to regroup so to speak and approch the topic from a more rational stand point.
I try to not take the difficult situation personally. I listen to their thoughts and try to collaborate on a solution. I remain professional and stay on task. I try to identify ways to improve myself as well as the other parties involved.
If the circumstances are not to desperate this is a great technique. Sometimes our fears or jealousy is shallow and not founded in good concrete information. When people have the opportunity to work together they have this opportunity to see each other in a different light. It seems they open up because they realize they are more alike than different. This has worked other in areas as race, people with disabilities or religion. As a manager and leader you can facilitate this activity so each member experiences these similarities.
When I ran into a problem with two individuals not getting along I spent a week or two of mentioning things in passing to both of them of their good work and common interest (in front of both of them) that I knew they had. I then put them on a project together, just the two of them. Since they were having to spend so much time together working they did start talking and while they never became friends they did learn to work together.
It is always benificial to satisfy your conflicts at the local level. Good policies for extended conflicts is a must. A process outlined is the best measure to alliviate tension of not knowing the next step.
I have dealt with it in the past by bringing the parties involved together and have them listen to each others issues and what has brought us to where we are at. Acknowledge their point and then make them see that we all have the same goals at heart. It is a difficult process because not everyone is receptive to others opinions, but in the end if the parties involved can arrive at a solution, you've won the battle.
I have a conflict going on now between a manager and one of their staff people, and the manager wants to bring me in to meet with them together. I have been reflecting on the course material and am planning to talk with the manager about first steps clarifing their own issues and motivations, emotions and self-esteem issues, before they meet with the staff person. I think they can do this on their own as a first step, and would be better than bringing me in right away. I know the staff person enough to know thay would feel like they were "turned in" by their manager if they were brought in to meet with me first.
I find the instruction of "listening" very helpful, especially when I feel challenged by the individual. This allows me to have time to monitor my own reactions.
Except for the owner of the company who is not often present, all of the staff and managers report to me. So I find that when I have a defensive reaction to an employee or try to push things to resolution, that it has a large negative effect within the whole organization. Being in the position of authority puts my actions under the spotlight, and if I am defensive or not fair, then it is the topic of converstation. It is as if a wave of distrust and "proof" that authority in general can't be trusted goes out and effects all things, with some specific folks eager to infomally lead the group in that direction.
I am finding it helpful lately to take more time informally in different moments during the day to get to know the folks who seem to me like they are dissatisfied or seperate (as they tend not to share about their feelings at our staff meetings). By my building more of a one-to one dialogue/relationship with them, they seem to feel more seen and appreciated, and they also develop more personal accountability for the relatioship we have together. This is much better then them staying away from me, and my trying to counter their negativity without actually knowing what it is about.
It is natural to have people seek out people that are more alike than different. Diversity is very healthy for an organization and helps with creativity and developing fo tolerance for differences in others. The best way to encourgage others to strike out and join in with others is to provide working and extra curricula activities that would include all the working constiuents. I have had opportunities as a manager to provide these activities at work by creating what I called circles of influence. These were made up with employees selected by me. Each circle had specific challenges to work on to report back on their views. The assignments had no real right or wrong answers but did require them employees to work with each other. Outcomes were very healthy and synergism was created by the people working together.
Outside activities always help when you can involve families. Spouses and children have a need to see what their loved ones are doing at work and who are their colleagues. Picnics, tickets to local events, sports events, fund raisers for breast cancer etc.
People generally want to belong it is our job to broaden their horizons by opening the doors to more opportunity for friends. This makes for a much more productive work environment.
I agree with you about solving work conflicts if possible at the lowest level in managment as possible.
When I first became the manager of a group of 10 people, a conflict between two people was brought to my attention. At this point it had been going on for some time and had started to affect others in the group. When it was brought to my attention by another person not involved in the conflict, I asked if they had said anything to the people in question. The response was a puzzled "no". I suggested that they try speaking to the people and letting them know that their feud was affecting others. This worked wonderfully and probably even better than if I had stepped in (especially at the time as a new manager of an existing team). I know that this won't always be the answer but I am a firm believer of letting people resolve their own conflicts if at all possible.
I'm now facing an issue where I want to encourage comraderie but at the same time discourage the formation of cliques. Cliques are starting to form in my group and is never good for day to day productivity. Any suggestions?
It is always good to separate the parties to neutral areas. This is the part where good communication is to listen to each party. If the parties or one them was inappropriate with their communication for actions you explain a better way of handling this in the future. But first listen to what they have to say and approach the guidance after they have reduced their emotion.
Have you had this happen to you?
I would attempt to separate the parties involved, so that the conflict does not get worse. I would let the person that is yelling, take a moment away from the office to cool down. Once, the yelling has stopped, I would ask the angry person to explain his reason for being upset and try to come up with a compromise between the two.
Great response. Your response always needs to maintain calm and not to raise to the level of emotion that may exist. What would you do if someone was yelling at you and an another employee?
I believe it is important to stay positive while dealing with the conflict between other staff members. Having guidelines for everyone to follow is necessary. Following a step by step process is important, so that things do not get out of hand. I have noticed that some effective steps include having one on one time with each of the parties involved, so that they can sort through their feelings about the situation, then allowing for an attempt to compromise, usually can get things going in a more positive direction.
I appreciate your plan of action with these difficult scenerios. YOu are on the right track. The key to success with these situations is your approach and keeping the emotion to a minimum.
Nice approach!
I agree. I have found that in the business of education you must be a good listener. I would start by inviting the individual into my office and as they enter the room I take great care in reading their body language. If I can sense they are uneasy I will re assure them by taking the opportunity to thank them for participating in the conversation that is about to take place. I then follow up with non threatening phrase to into the dialogue, like "I understand their have been some difficulties between the two of you and I am here to help you both work through them". I would then proceed on by again asking in an un obtrusive manner for one of them to begin explaining the situation. As they tell their side of the story I watch for body language and continuously confirm what the are saying, sometimes by repeating it back to them. This gives the individual reassurance that I understand what they are trying to communicate. I would then proceed by asking the other party to express their view of the situation. Once I have confirmed both sides of the story I then introduce some instances which could have possible occurred during the breakdown. For example perhaps a phrase was taken out of context or simply miss interpreted by the other party. I also re assure them that honest mistakes can happen and that even I am susceptible to them. After milling through the conversation I would conclude with asking them “how do you think we can improve on this so that it does not occur again." At this point I listen to their ideas and then ask them both to come up with a workable plan and in conclusion I as to see them the following week to make sure their differences have been ironed out. I find giving the power to the employees really makes a difference in how the problems are resolved.
