Content area
Full Text
Conflict in the workplace doesn't have to bring catastrophe and confusion. It can be a powerful catalyst for improved communication and quality.
Every partnership produces conflict. It is not possible for people to participate in improving the quality of their products and services, or the quality of their processes, without experiencing it. The only question, the only choice, is how to experience it.
Every organization, every team, every person in conflict chooses whether to avoid, give in to, engage in, compromise, or use conflict to learn more about what is not working-and improve the level of quality and participation in their communications and relationships.
Everyone knows intuitively that to genuinely resolve their conflicts they must get to the bottom of what is not working. They have to find the source, the wellspring that is fueling their fight, and break the system that is producing it. Yet as they get closer to the heart of that system, the possibility increases that something fundamental might change.
Unfortunately, in organizational conflicts, there often emerges a desire to either fight it out or retreat and accommodate it. Both of these approaches mean abandoning the possibility of personal and organizational learning, healthier relationships, honest communication, and improved results.
Conflicts generated by organizational partnerships
A visionary leader of an information-systems organization planned to transform the structure of her organization from a hierarchy to self directed teams. Her internal organizational customers were skeptical and felt threatened by this development. They demanded high levels of detailed information and feared they would not receive a high quality level of customer service. Employees watched the leaders of these internal organizations lock in combat over the future of their relationship. Their commitment and motivation began to rapidly deteriorate.
A new employee was assigned to a high performance team that had a successful track record of several years. The other team members communicated so well they often finished each other's sentences. The new recruit had been effective as a loner and felt rejected by the team's closeness. He immediately told them that he didn't "believe in all this communication stuff" and didn't respect them. The entire group became mired in conflict and their performance declined.
Two deputy directors of an information-systems division ofa large commercial bank...