# Managing Groups and Teams/Conflict

## Conflict Defined

Conflict can exist between factions or groups within a team, with a
leader or manager, and with other teams or departments within the
company. It has been defined in numerously different ways and has come
to hold several connotations. The following is an example of a
relatively broad dictionary entry, where ***conflict*** is defined in
the following way(s):

**Conflict**

**1**. To come into collision or disagreement; be contradictory, at
variance, or in opposition; clash: The account of one eyewitness
conflicted with that of the other. My class conflicts with my going to
the concert.

**2**. To fight or contend; do battle.

**3**. A fight, battle, or struggle, esp. a prolonged struggle; strife.

**4**. Controversy; quarrel: conflicts between parties.

**5**. Discord of action, feeling, or effect; antagonism or opposition,
as of interests or principles: a conflict of ideas.

**6**. A striking together; collision.

**7**. Incompatibility or interference, as of one idea, desire, event,
or activity with another: a conflict in the schedule.

**8**. Psychiatry. a mental struggle arising from opposing demands or
impulses.

### _**Conflict in Groups and Teams**_

Conflict inevitably arises in one form or another in varying degrees due
to the mere group and/or team dynamics of having people with differing
backgrounds, ideas, and potential agendas coming together in an effort
to accomplish a common goal. Conflict is generally considered to be
negative and something to be avoided. Numerous frameworks such as
LaFasto and Larson\'s CONNECT model have been developed to help rid
groups of negative conflict. However, conflict isn't always negative and
there are circumstances in which positive conflict is necessary in order
to prevent compliance tendencies and the potentially disastrous effects
of *groupthink*.

In the following sections, the positive and negative realms of conflict
will be outlined and further detailed in an effort to narrow the scope
of conflict while helping to navigate some of the more negative
connotations that easily come to mind when thinking about conflict. Use
all positive words and actions and you will get the same back, respect
others and they will respect you.

## Types of Conflict that a Team Can Face

***Positive conflict**vs**Negative conflict***

### **Positive conflict**

![](Challenger_explosion.jpg "Challenger_explosion.jpg"){width="400"}
Positive conflict is the notion that a healthy discourse may exist in
the disagreement among group members regarding personality traits,
styles, or characteristics or the content of their ideas, decisions or
task processes which involves a pathway towards resolution. Any
tolerable amount of conflict is vital to group success in order to avoid
groupthink and to generate more innovative ideas among potentially and
vastly differing members of the group. In addition, positive conflict
generates buy-in and offers elements of ownership and a sense of
cooperation and enhanced membership to all of the group members.
Positive conflict reduces the effects of conformity pressures and
groupthink. Groupthink occurs when conformity and compliance pressures
are exaggerated, and it generally occurs in the absence of task
conflict. One of the most devastating examples of groupthink occurred on
the morning of January 28th, 1986 in which the Challenger space
shuttle exploded over the
Atlantic Ocean after the failure of an O-ring. This failure resulted
from the O-ring being unable to withstand extreme temperatures in which
the O-ring had never been truly tested. Numerous NASA staff members were
aware of the possible failure of the O-ring in extreme temperatures, and
they were also aware of the ramifications should the O-ring break.
However, the decision making process regarding whether or not the
shuttle was safe to launch was riddled with flaws that ultimately
created a breeding ground for groupthink. To illustrate, the Challenger
launch had been postponed several times before this scheduled date, and
there was direct pressure from NASA to approve the launch. There was
also media pressure as they were scheduled to film the launch, since it
would be the first time a teacher was sent into space. NASA officials
feared public ridicule if the launch was delayed again, and as early as
six days prior to the launch, NASA put the pressure on. They told the
inspectors to stop thinking like inspectors and start thinking like
managers, and they rationalized that there was no conclusive evidence to
suggest that the O-ring would not work. As a result, the inspectors
bowed to conformity pressures and gave the approval to launch. The
resulting launch and subsequent death of all 7 crew members aboard the
Challenger shook the nation and was not the front page news that NASA
had hoped for.

Other disasters that occurred due to conformity pressures include the
Bay of Pigs, the Tenerife plane crash disaster, the holocaust, and many
others. To test how strong the effects of conformity pressures are on
less cohesive groups and among individuals that were only recently
introduced, Solomon Asch
conducted his famous conformity experiment in which a group of random
participants were shown a picture of the following lines, and they were
asked which line in the second group of lines is approximately the same
height as the first line shown.

!Example of the cards shown to the participants of the
study{width="300"}

Individuals that were a part of the experiment (confederates to the
experiment) selected an obviously inappropriate line such as line "B" as
their answer. The results were astounding in which the remaining
individual in the group (not a confederate to the experiment) also
selected line "B" as their answer due to perceived pressures to conform.
Conformity occurs as a result of individuals' desire to be liked and
their need to be right. Therefore, they tend to fall victim to false
consensus biases and generally
bring their behavior in line with the group's expectations and beliefs.
So how are you to know if your group is falling prey to conformity
pressures and groupthink? Here are some common symptoms:

:\*Illusions of invulnerability

:\*Rationalization & justification

:\*Illusion of group morality

:\*Stereotyping the out-group as weaker, evil, or stupid

:\*Direct or indirect peer or supervisory pressures

:\*Self-censorship by team members

:\*Illusions of unanimity

First, realizing that you and your group are affected by or susceptible
to conformity pressures and groupthink is very important. Next, in order
to create a norm of conflict, it is essential that a feeling of
psychology safety is present. This can be instated by encouraging
objections, criticisms, and altering perspectives. Also, as a leader,
one should avoid making clear statements about your preferences, create
subgroups, have outside experts come in to observe the decision making
process, and re-examine the next best alternatives once a decision has
been reached. Finally, limiting the size of the group and assigning
roles that make conflict commonplace (such as a "Devil's
Advocate") will help to discourage and
minimize compliance pressures. After the Challenger explosion, NASA took
similar steps to avoid future disasters in which they instituted a
verbal and video recorded affirmation from several NASA officials that
certify flight readiness. Furthermore, NASA\'s managers instituted a
veto policy in which anyone at any level is given the authority to stop
the flight process.

In addition to avoiding groupthink and conformity pressures, positive
conflict is more likely to generate a sense of membership, involvement,
and enthusiasm from all group members and is also more likely to lead to
the infusion of more creative and innovative ideas. This results from
each team member having the opportunity to voice his or her own
perspective on the issues being decided by the group. When individuals
feel more involved in the decision making process, they are more likely
to state a high satisfaction level with their team and are additionally
more likely to want to continue working as a member of that team.

Creating a heterogeneous team is another
way to encourage diverse perspectives, opinions, and ideas.
Heterogeneous groups also have a broader knowledge base resulting from a
variety of experiences, backgrounds, skills, and achievements.
Comparable to other investment strategies that are somewhat more risky
(in terms of the increased likelihood for ensuing conflict levels),
diverse teams stand a greater chance for potential return and favorable
results as well.

### **Negative conflict**

!Interactions{width="250"} In
diverse and heterogeneous teams, negative conflict has a tendency to
emerge in varying degrees due to the mere dynamics of having diverse
individuals with differing backgrounds, ideas, and potential agendas
coming together. Negative conflict can arise in several different arenas
including the following:

:\*Conflict can arise between factions or groups within a team.

::\*Subgroups, or factions, can develop within a team. Each group has
their own opinions and will stick together and oppose other factions
within the team. Organizations can be greatly divided by such factions

:\*Conflict can develop between team members and the leader of the team.

::\*Team members can disagree with the team leader. This can lead to
refusal to follow the direction of the team leader. There may be
conflict with management because management has not given clear goals to
the team or may not be supporting the team. The organization could have
a culture that does not allow teams to work effectively.

:\*Conflict can form between the different teams or departments in the
organization.

Unlike positive conflict, negative conflict is better if avoided and
must be swiftly addressed and resolved when it does present itself. Due
to the dangerous nature and destructive effects negative conflict has on
productivity and moral, it may potentially lead to Human Resource
Management issues or even a lawsuit. In order to set the stage so that
interpersonal conflict is avoided or at least minimized, firms can
prevent the establishment of in-groups and out-groups, foster open
communication and trust, understand the various personality styles that
comprise a group, and coach effective communication skills and
perspective taking skills to team members.

An example of a firm, where the formation of in-groups and out-groups
fostered so much negative conflict, was the Lehman Brothers firm, this
in-group and out-group culture lead to the selling of the firm. Within
this firm, a strong separation between Traders and Bankers literally
divided the corporation and led to its ultimate demise. Differences
between the functions were exaggerated and there was a perception that
each of the divisions was pursuing its own unique and more valuable
objectives. There was not a unified vision within the company and
personality conflict was commonplace. The Traders believed that the
Bankers were lazy \"Ivy League\" graduates who were awarded greater
benefits simply to uphold the status-quo. The Bankers perceived the
Brokers as less intelligent, blue collar workers who deserved less
compensation and rewards. Creating in-groups and out-groups in a company
leads to an unhealthy competition between the groups. Each faction ends
up battling for a greater share of the company's limited resources and
an "us" vs. "them" rational emerges, while energy is wasted on trying to
prove which group is better rather than to maintain common goals. As
demonstrated by the infamous Robbers Cave Experiment conducted by
Muzafer Sherif, working toward a common goal and maintaining common
purpose is essential for group unity and contributes to the reduction of
personal conflict. In this experiment, 22 boy scouts were assigned to
two separate camps and neither group was aware of the other\'s
existence. Each boy formed a strong identification with his own group,
and the scouts were even allowed to select a group name. The first
contact between the two groups was to play a competitive sport and
friction emerged between the groups almost immediately. During the
resolution phase of the experiment, a task was developed in which the
two groups were forced to cooperate and work together toward achieving a
common purpose that neither group could achieve alone. A broken-down
truck that needed to be towed back to the camp was staged, and the two
groups had to combine their man-power to tow the truck. By the end of
the experiment, the in-groups and out-groups had merged, and the entire
group even insisted upon riding back home on the same bus together. In
addition to forming a super-ornate goal for group members to achieve,
pointing out what group members have in common and defusing stereotypes
is a way to prevent the formation of an out-group.

Fostering support, trust, and open communication is also essential if
relationship conflicts are to be reduced and quickly resolved. Open
communication can be established by the following:

:\***Establish ground rules.**

::\*Take turns when talking and do not interrupt. Ensure that each team
member has equal time when stating their perspective. Listen for
something new and say bring something new to the discussion. Avoid
restating the facts and "talking in circles." Avoid power plays and
eliminate status or titles from the discussion

:\***Listen compassionately**

::\*Avoid thinking of a counterargument while the other person is
speaking. Listen to the other person's perspective rather than listening
to your own thoughts. Don't make an effort to remember points.

:\***Point out the advantages of resolving the conflict.**

:\***Maintain a neutral vantage point and be willing to be persuaded.**

:\***Avoid all-or-none statements such as "always" and "never" and point
out exceptions when these statements are used.**

::\*(IE: What does it look like when Marketing does consult sales before
acting?)

:\***Create a goal of discovery rather than of winning or persuading.**

:\***Be alert to common goals and where goals overlap as each party is
communicating their perspective.**

:\***Use clarifying statements to ensure the other party feels
understood and listened to such as, "What I heard you say is that you
feel unappreciated and that you lack vital feedback to help you perform,
is this correct?"**

:\***Help team members to separate the problem from the person.**

:\***Use techniques such as role-playing, putting oneself in the
competitor's shoes, or conducting war games. Such techniques create
fresh perspectives and engage team members.**

:\***Team members should recognize each other for having expressed his
view and feelings.**

::\*Thanking one another recognizes the personal risk the individual
took in breaking from group think and should be viewed as an expression
of trust and commitment toward the team.

:\*\'\'\'Help each team member to understand one anothers\' perspective,
and help them to re-frame the situation.

::\*The exact same situation can often be viewed differently by several
individuals. To illustrate, what did you see first in the picture below,
the young woman or the old woman?

!Which do you see?{width="200"}

Once a team has received coaching on how to communicate effectively,
address conflict situations immediately as they arise. Letting tense
situations fester will only allow time for animosity to polarize and
grow. Helping team members to reframe the problem and see it from the
other individual's perspective can also be accomplished directly, via
cross-training and job shadowing which allows each team member to draw
from a frame of reference by walking in the other team member\'s shoes.
Utilizing the Big 5 personality
test descriptions will also add
an element of understanding to the group dynamic. To illustrate, if
Jimmy is highly extroverted, neurotic, and conscientious, it may help
Tim, who is not quite as extroverted as than Jim and who is more
agreeable, to understand where Jimmy's seemingly endless ability to
voice his irritation with others is stemming from, and he may not take
it as personally. In addition, Jimmy may better understand and get less
irritated with Tim's perceived inability to take initiative and make
decisions efficiently.

Finally, understanding common stereotypes and mental shortcuts that are
used when passing judgment on others will make team members more aware
of how these shortcuts are leading to bias conclusions. The common
cognitive biases and a brief description are as follows:

:\*Self Fulfilling Prophecy:
the tendency to engage in behaviors that elicit results which will
(consciously or subconsciously) confirm our beliefs.

:\*Halo Effect: the tendency for a person\'s
positive or negative traits to \"spill over\" from one area of their
personality to another in others\' perceptions of them

:\*Primacy Effect: the tendency to weigh
initial events more than subsequent events.

:\*Recency Effect: the tendency to weigh
recent events more than earlier events

:\*Availability Heuristic: a
biased prediction, due to the tendency to focus on the most salient and
emotionally-charged outcome.

:\*Selective Perception:
selectively attend to data that supports your conclusion while omitting
valid evidence that does not.

:\*Actor-Observer Bias: the tendency
for explanations for other individual\'s behaviors to overemphasize the
influence of their personality and underemphasize the influence of their
situation. This is coupled with the opposite tendency for the self in
that one\'s explanations for their own behaviors overemphasize their
situation and underemphasize the influence of their personality.

:\*Hindsight Bias: sometimes called the
\"I-knew-it-all-along\" effect, the inclination to see past events as
being predictable.

:\*Illusory Correlation: beliefs
that inaccurately suppose a relationship between a certain type of
action and an effect

:\*Egocentric Bias: occurs when people
claim more responsibility for themselves for the results of a joint
action than an outside observer would.

:\*False Consensus Bias: the
tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree
with them.

:\*Fundamental Attribution
Bias: the tendency for
people to over-emphasize personality-based explanations for behaviors
observed in others while under-emphasizing the role and power of
situational influences on the same behavior

:\*Just World Phenomenon: the
tendency for people to believe that the world is \"just\" and therefore
people \"get what they deserve.\"

:\*Self Serving Bias: the tendency to
claim more responsibility for successes than failures. It may also
manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous
information in a way beneficial to their interests

:\*Illusion of Transparency:
people overestimate others\' ability to know them, and they also
overestimate their ability to know others.

:\*Ingroup Bias: the tendency for people to
give preferential treatment to others they perceive to be members of
their own groups.

**"...If you form a picture in your mind of what you would like to be
and hold it there long enough, you will soon become exactly as you have
been thinking."** --William James,
Professor of Psychology, Harvard
University.

## Why is Conflict Resolution Important in a Team Setting?

Whether we embrace it or avoid it, conflict is an inherent part of the
human condition. Unlike certain tasks or responsibilities, conflict is
not isolated to one or another aspect of life. With conflict looming all
about us, why should we even bother trying to resolve it? Or, if
conflict is inherent to being human, is it then presumptuous to even
attempt its resolution? We propose that, in the vast majority of
instances of team conflict, avoidance is a worse solution than
engagement with the conflicting situation. Moreover, avoided conflict
will lead to less optimal solutions and may even prevent the team from
finishing a project. Thus, from a manager's perspective, it is a simple
equation of a cost/benefits analysis in that the cost to the
organization is greater when teams avoid conflict than when they engage
it. In this chapter we will discuss the symptoms of conflict and
recommend solutions for their resolution.

Conflict absorbs team resources that could be better utilized working
towards the team's goals. As discussed, managers should manage conflict
in a way that leads the team towards completion of team goals.

## What are the Symptoms of Team Conflict?

Almost everyone has endured the experience of being part of a team that
was plagued with conflict. Whether in a large group that erupts in anger
and can't finish a meeting, or a small group of two or three individuals
that resort to backbiting and gossiping to vent frustration over a
conflict, everyone has been a part of a team where conflict has gotten
out of control. With this in mind, there are several symptoms of
conflict that can be identified in groups which can help groups to
recognize and manage conflict before it tears them apart. By identifying
the following symptoms related to communication, trust, and opposing
agendas, the team leader can identify conflict before it erupts. As you
read through these symptoms, think of the teams that you are a part of
and look for symptoms that exist in your team.

One common symptom of conflict is a lack of
communication or a lack of respectful
communication. This is most often seen when teams fail to have
meaningful meetings. Most often, non-communicating meetings are
characterized by team members sitting and listening to what the boss has
to say. Often chatter or silence prevails in teams. A lack of
communication can also be noted when team members don't get along, and
so refuse to talk to each other. These feuds create barriers within
teams and prevent communication in the team. A lack of communication or
disrespectful communication leads to a lack of trust, which is another
symptom of team conflict. Teams that fail to produce desired results
often lack the trust in one another as team members necessary to
succeed. Without trust in a team, verbal or non-verbal conflict becomes
the norm of the team. Team members spend more energy protecting their
own positions and jobs then they do producing what is required for the
team's success. When trust erodes in a team, the habit of blaming others
becomes the norm as individuals try to protect themselves. Team members
become enemies that compete against each other rather than allies that
build and help one another to achieve a common goal. Teams that lack
trust often gossip about other members or have frequent side
conversations after meetings to discuss opposing opinions. Such activity
sucks strength out of the team and its purpose.

Another symptom of team conflict can be seen when team members have
opposing agendas. This is not to be confused with members who have
different opinions. Having different opinions in a group can be very
healthy if managed correctly because it can create better ideas and ways
of getting the job done. However, when team members have opposing
agendas, more is at stake than differing opinions; it is two individuals
fiercely committed to the exact opposite approach. Opposing agendas can
create confusion in team members and can cause them to lose sight of
their role in the team and the team's final goal. Teams must work toward
a common goal in order to be successful. Extreme effort must be made to
reconcile differences, or such a team can look forward to failure.

## What are Appropriate Solutions to Conflict?

As mentioned above, conflict is a natural and necessary element of a
healthy team experience. If a team never experiences conflict, it is
less likely to be as productive as a team that does experience conflict.
This is especially true if the task that a team is attempting to
complete is complex in nature or highly detailed. Without having members
question specific actions, decisions, or the specifics of the proposed
solution, it may appear to the team that there is only one way in which
to solve the problem or complete the task.

One way in which a team can avoid being unproductive is by selecting
members with different backgrounds. This can be difficult because people
often assume that individuals who think similarly and get along with one
another will be more productive when working together. But this is not
necessarily true. In many cases having groups of people who think alike
and are not willing to voice their disagreement can be detrimental, or
even dangerous. Popular examples of this group think phenomenon are
noted in the Kennedy Administration's disaster with regards to the Bay
of Pigs, or those involved with the Challenger shuttle launch.
Differences among team members should however, be task orientated and
not personal or relationship oriented. Relationship conflicts are rarely
productive. If potential members of a team have a history of conflict
due to relationships and not in relation to tasks, one or both should
probably not be chosen as a team member. Additionally, peacekeepers
should also be avoided, unless the team environment fosters a very safe
atmosphere where the peacekeeper will feel comfortable enough to speak
out in the team setting. In this case, a difference in opinion could be
beneficial, but it might not be presented due to the member's
disproportionate desire to avoid conflict.

Avoiding the potential for group think, relationship conflicts, and
peacekeepers in choosing team members will help to promote healthy
conflict. But commitment is equally important. If team members are
individually or collectively indifferent toward the overall goal, they
probably will not perform well. A lack of commitment can also lead to a
lack of conflict. If the team is committed to the overall goal and
members are well chosen, there can be a healthy dose of conflict in the
process to complete the task.

When conflict does occur, it is important to address it immediately.
Although developing a solution to the conflict may take time,
acknowledging it will help to ensure that it can become productive to
the team. "Whatever the problem, effective teams identify, raise, and
resolve it. If it's keeping them from reaching their goal, effective
teams try to do something about it. They don't ignore it and hope it
goes away." By not addressing conflict, the leader risks sending the
message that conflict is unmanageable and cause vested members to become
complacent or feel their input is not valued. In the worst scenario, a
conflict that is not resolved could go from being task orientated to
personal.

## How Can a Team Prevent Negative Conflict?

Conflict may be inevitable on a team and may even have a positive
effect, "the absence of conflict is not harmony, it's apathy." However,
most of us have had experience with the crippling side of conflict. In
this section we offer insight into how other teams have successfully
managed conflict and make recommendations for mechanisms to put into
place in order to prevent harmful conflict. How do successful teams
manage conflict?

Three business professors, who studied teams which had learned how to
successfully "fight" in a team without allowing the conflict to become
destructive, found some common themes as to how such teams function.
First, successful teams worked with more, rather than less information
and debated on the basis of facts. Second, teams developed multiple
alternatives to enrich the level of debate. Third, productive teams
shared commonly agreed upon goals and objectives. Fourth, teams injected
humor into the decision-making process. Fifth, teams maintained a
balanced power structure. And sixth, teams resolved issues without
forcing consensus.

In another study, which surveyed 15,000 team members and their
assessments of their team mates, two professors found that the most
important behaviors in team relationships are openness and
supportiveness, "Regardless of whether it was a working relationship
with a peer, a superior, or a direct report, the result was the same.
The two factors identified as most important were openness and
supportiveness." Moreover, the authors identify specifically what is
meant by these two adjectives within a team context: openness "refers to
the ability to surface and deal with issues objectively," while
supportiveness "refers to bringing out the best thinking and attitude in
the other person."

From the above insights into successful teams, we start to see that such
teams put a high value on fact-based decisions and are able to set up
mechanisms that bring out the best in each team member and facilitate
information sharing. Drawing from these insights, then, what specific
measures, should a new leader or newly formed team put into place to
ensure the team can withstand conflict and even gain the benefits of
creativity that comes out of conflict?

## How Do Teams Prevent Damaging Conflict?

In order to prevent damaging conflict, the team leader must lay a
conflict-friendly foundation for the team. The following approach will
help the team leader to set the stage for conflict that is creative and
productive:

1.  Set a clear goal for the team.
2.  Make expectations for team members explicit.
3.  Assemble a heterogeneous team, including diverse ages, genders,
    functional backgrounds, and industry experience.
4.  Meet together as a team regularly and often. Team members that don't
    know one another well doesn't know positions on the issues,
    impairing their ability to argue effectively. Frequent interaction
    builds the mutual confidence and familiarity team members require
    expressing dissent.
5.  Assign roles such as devil's advocate and sky-gazing visionary and
    change these roles up from meeting to meeting. This is important to
    ensure all sides of an issue have been considered.
6.  Use techniques such as role-playing, putting oneself in the
    competitor's shoes, or conducting war games. Such techniques create
    fresh perspectives and engage team members.
7.  Actively manage conflict. Don't let the team acquiesce too soon or
    too easily. Identify and treat apathy early, and don't confuse a
    lack of conflict with agreement.

## Resolving Conflict

Interpersonal conflict should be managed and resolved before it
degenerates into verbal assault and irreparable damage to a team.
Dealing with interpersonal conflict can be a difficult and uncomfortable
process. Usually, as team members, we use carefully worded statements to
avoid frictions when confronting conflict.

The first step to resolving interpersonal conflict is in acknowledging
the existence of the interpersonal conflict. Recognizing the conflict
allows team members to build common ground by putting the conflict
within the context of the larger goal of the team and the organization.
Moreover, the larger goal can help by giving team members a motive for
resolving the conflict.

The Rosetta Stone for dealing with conflict is communication. As team
members we all understand the inevitability of interpersonal conflicts.
Moreover, as we have established above, open and supportive
communication is vital to a high performing team. One way to achieve
this is by separating the problem from the person. Problems can be
debated without damaging working relationships. When interpersonal
conflict occurs, all sides of the issue should be recognized without
finger-pointing or blaming. Above all, when team member gets yelled at
or blamed for something, it has the effect of silencing the whole team.
It gives the signal to everyone that dissent is not allowed, and, as we
know, dissent is one of the most fertile resources for new ideas.

When faced with conflict, it is natural for team members to become
defensive. However defensiveness usually makes it more difficult to
resolve a conflict. A conflict-friendly team environment must encourage
effective listening. Effective listening includes listening to one
another attentively, without interruption (this includes not having side
conversations, doodling, or vacant stares). The fundamentals to
resolving team conflict include the following elements:

1.  Prior to stating one's view, a speaker should seek to understand
    what others have said. This can be done in a few clarifying
    sentences,
2.  Seek to make explicit what the opposing sides have in common. This
    helps to reinforce what is shared between the disputants,
3.  Whether or not an agreement is reached, team members should thank
    the other for having expressed his view and feelings. Thanking the
    other recognizes the personal risk the individual took in breaking
    from group think and should be viewed as an expression of trust and
    commitment toward the team.

### How Can Teams Resolve Conflict Between Factions?

In resolving conflict between factions, the team leader should start by
bringing the groups together and acknowledging there is a conflict. The
team leader should make sure all group members are clear about the group
goal. Not only should each group member understand what the goal is,
they each need to be willing to work toward achieving it.

Set ground rules for the group if this has not been done. An important
rule to include is to eliminate outside politicking. When disagreements
or issues arise, they should be discussed within the group. Factions
should not have separate discussions about the problem. If ground rules
have already been established, discuss whether all agree with them and
are willing to follow them. Discuss the methods and processes that will
be used to reach the team goal. Again, it is important to get all team
members working together towards the common goal.

The team leader should stay alert to one faction forcing a particular
solution. If such an instance arises, those forcing a solution should be
asked to articulate the reason behind their thinking. Once the thinking
has been articulated, there can be open discussion as to the merits and
drawbacks to the proposed solution.

### What Should a Team Leader Do To Resolve Conflict and Promote Team Performance?

Team leaders have the responsibility of resolving conflict within their
teams. There are things that team leaders can do to make a team where
conflict resolution occurs naturally. One thing that team leaders can do
in their groups to resolve conflict is to set up team rules from the
outset. As discussed earlier, such team rules can guide team members to
resolve conflict between themselves, rather than going to the leader to
resolve all conflict. Team leaders should foster an environment in their
teams that is safe and positive. Such an environment will help foster
communication and will help team members to resolve conflicts. Team
leaders can also provide retreats and other activities away from the
office that will help to build team unity and trust. These factors will
also strengthen a team and help to avoid negative conflict before it
begins.

Team leaders can also strictly monitor performance issues in their
group. Performance issues that go unresolved create relationship
conflict and a lack of motivation and morale. Performance issues in
individual team members must be addressed immediately in order to avoid
issues in the group. This doesn't mean that team leaders always need to
eliminate poor performing team members immediately. Sometimes it is the
responsibility of the team leader to provide extra training to team
members when they're struggling, to help them meet expectations. When
attitudes need to be changed, awareness can be brought to how a team
member's attitude negatively affects the team and invitations can be
given for attitudes to improve.

In this process it is vital for the team leader to remember that
accountability must be held with team members. Without accountability in
a team, focus on the goal will not occur and teams won't produce desired
outcomes. Accountability promotes achievement and helps team members to
reach their potential. A lack of accountability can produce great task
conflict and relationship conflict. Full accountability can help produce
a feeling of fulfillment and achievement and teams will achieve their
optimal performance.

### How Can a Team Member Resolve a Conflict with the Team Leader?

If a team member has a conflict with the team leader, the first step is
to identify the type of conflict. If the conflict relates to the goal of
the team, then it would appear that the goal is not clear. The conflict
can also relate to the processes being used by the team. In either
situation, the team member can bring up the issue in a group meeting.
Ask that the goal be clarified so that all team members understand what
it is. If processes were never discussed and decided on by the team, now
would be an appropriate time to do so. If the team leader does not want
to discuss these issues in a team meeting, the team member should
approach the leader separately to discuss. The team member should
explain the issue and why the current situation is not working. Again,
ask that the team be allowed to discuss these issues.

If the conflict is interpersonal between the team leader and a team
member, the issue should be discussed privately between the two. The
team member should go to the leader and explain that there appears to be
conflict and that he or she would like to resolve it. LaFasto and Larson
outline an approach that can be used to resolve conflict called the
Connect Model. The steps involved in the model are as follows:

1.  Commit to the relationship.
2.  Optimize safety.
3.  Narrow to one issue.
4.  Neutralize defensiveness.
5.  Explain and echo.
6.  Change one behavior each.
7.  Track it!

These steps provide a great review of what has been discussed throughout
this chapter and will help to resolve the issue between a team leader
and team member.

In summary, team conflict is an important and integral part of any team
that exists. As we have outlined it in this chapter, conflict, if
approached effectively and managed appropriately, can exponentially work
in the favor of any team. Appropriate management of the relative type of
team conflict at hand is critical for teams to be successful. This
chapter has discussed several of the aspects of team conflict and how
they can be best managed and potentially resolved. These concepts will
help teams improve their functionality and dynamic effectiveness in an
effort to reach their ultimate goals in reaching to be a high performing
team.

## References

-   Greenhalgh, Leonard. \"Managing Conflict.\" Sloan Management Review
    (Summer 2006): 45-51.
-   Lafasto, Frank, and Carl Larson. \"When teams Work Best\". Thousand
    Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications, 2001.
    
-   Siegel, Matt. \"The Perils of Culture Conflict.\" Fortune. November
    1998: 257-262.
-   Simons, Tony L., and Randall S. Peterson. \"Task Conflict and
    Relationship Conflict in Top Management Teams: The Pivotal Role of
    Intragroup Trust\". Journal of Applied Psychology. 85.1 (2000):
    102-111.
-   Taylor, Susan M. \"Manage Conflict Through Negotiation and
    Mediation.\" The Blackwell Handbook of Principles of Organizational
    Behavior, 2003. .
-   Weingart, Laurie, and Karen A. Jehn. \"Manage Intra-Team Conflict
    Through Collaboration.\" The Blackwell Handbook of Principles of
    Organizational Behavior, 2003. .

