The roles of managers in conflict

This is the first of two articles addressing the manager's roles in relation to conflict.

Many managers only begin to consider their roles in managing friction and conflict when they are forced to do so because of the interference or the disruption caused by the friction or conflict to the delivery of the mission or goals of their department or organisation.  By the time the impact of the friction or conflict becomes apparent to the manager, it is often far too late for easy solutions - people have taken up and become attached to polarised positions, the conflict has escalated to the point of becoming an adversarial power struggle, parties have become emotionally heated and volatile, identities and self-images are at stake and at risk, and the dynamic has become one of avoiding responsibility for one's contribution, blaming the other and trying to make them change. 

Friction and conflict are both a danger and an opportunity.  The dangers which need to be avoided are perhaps more obvious - disruption to task and goals, breakdowns in communication and relationship, stress, and costs in terms of time taken up to deal with it and the costs of absenteeism, replacement of staff or even legal costs.  The potential benefits are less obvious because we are currently less competent in generating them - vibrant energy, learning, creativity, strengthening of relationships, high performance and productivity.

In order to be effective in managing friction and conflict the manager needs to begin to consider how they will deal with it long before they begin to experience its impact.  Early recognition or even anticipation of where the friction or conflict is likely to appear in the team or organisation can prevent its escalation, avoid many of the dangers and make the benefits more accessible.  This requires that the manager develops a greater awareness and mindfulness regarding conflict, how it is generated and can be harnessed, and how to create a culture which values friction rather than seeing it as something dysfunctional to be ashamed of and avoided such as it is viewed in most organisations currently.

Apart from cultural barriers to recognition and acknowledgement, failure on the managers part to recognise the distinction between routine technical challenges and adaptive challenges can result in the failure to deal effectively with friction and conflict.  Routine or technical challenges can be resolved by applying our current level of communication and problem-solving skills to bring about a known and desired result.  Adaptive challenges on the other hand are more complex and beyond our level of competence; the result often cannot be determined in advance and, critically, adaptive challenges require that we make significant change in ourselves rather than simply to change other people, as is commonly the case in our current ways of dealing with conflict. 

Adaptive challenges become clear when our current skills fail but we often continue to apply routine skills while hoping for a different result.  Early recognition of the shortfall of our skills level should alert us to adaptive challenges rather than triggering negative judgements of ourselves or others and defensiveness that blind us to the need for an adaptive response.  A greater understanding of the generators and escalation dynamics can facilitate early recognition of both friction and conflict and the need for an adaptive response.

Like a great river, the source of friction and conflict is a long way upstream and hidden from view at the point where the power and momentum of the conflict demonstrates its destructive potential.  The upstream sources of friction and conflict lie in our differences - personality, gender, power, ethnicity, roles, goals, ways of working, beliefs, values and so on.  Yet, these generators are occluded in the heat and storm of the conflict in its more obvious or destructive phases, e.g. when it has escalated beyond productive interaction. 

However, if managers are going to be able to pre-empt or minimise destructiveness they will need to understand how differences can escalate from gentle sources of friction into raging conflict and be able to identify and channel them upstream before they become uncontrollable forces in human interaction.   I have addressed much of what may be needed to achieve this elsewhere.  Here I try to help managers consider the different roles they may need to play in managing friction and conflict more effectively and the developmental challenges posed by them. 

I have identified six aspects of the manager's role that are highly relevant to the management of friction and conflict.  There is nothing new or different in these - they are what one would expect of a good manager and apply to many other aspects of the manager's task and responsibilities besides their role in managing friction and conflict.  What is different here is the application in relation to friction and conflict.  In the second article (May issue) I will take a more detailed exploration of each role.  Managers may exercise some or all of these roles in relation to their level of competence but ideally they are competent across the range.  The role of mediator is not included on the grounds that the manager always has an appropriate bias in favour of the business needs and the role requires a neutral stance and non-attachment to outcomes if it is to be effective.  The roles considered are: -

1. Leader
2. Model
3. Educator
4. Coach
5. Facilitator
6. Arbitrator

1.              Leader

The role of the leader is about setting clear vision, encouraging and enabling others to act in relation to friction and conflict.   The leader will be concerned with the impact of friction and conflict on the business and will be proactive in ensuring that it is dealt with in a constructive manner which takes account of the competing needs, interests, values and relationships of all concerned.  The importance of keeping focused on a clear and compelling vision and the benefits which will accrue to all from its achievement is critical in helping followers deal with and move beyond the blockages or breakdowns that may be generated during conflict.

2.             Model

This role is about practicing what you preach, leading by example.  Modelling plays a key role in culture setting and demonstrating commitment to and trust in non-adversarial ways of dealing with friction and conflict.  It enhances both the credibility of the leader and of the methods being used.  Depending on the maturity and skill of the manager, it can demonstrate the balance between the vulnerability and use of power required to be effective in managing friction and conflict.  Seeing power and emotion being handled openly and respectfully provides a model and encouragement for staff to do likewise.

3.             Educator

As educator you play a key role in providing information and new frameworks to help staff reflect on and understand friction and conflict.  By helping them to reflect on the way they think about conflict and giving them feedback about the way they currently handle it, you open up new possibilities for learning and development and behavioural options of which they may not have been aware.  The focus here is not to persuade or advocate but to enable them to appreciate the complexity of what they are dealing with and the need to develop personally to meet a level of challenge that usually demands a higher level of emotional, cognitive and behavioural skill than routine day to day interactions.

4.             Coach

The broad intent behind the coaching role is to

1. extend the breath and depth of their awareness and understanding of themselves, others and the context as well as the issues involved
2. create choices that will best serve their interests and needs keeping in mind the context, the needs, interests and values of others and of the business.
3. develop the understanding, strategies and skills needed to deal constructively with the friction/conflict;
4. help them manage their state and relationships in such a way as to provide a strong platform within which to inquire into, resolve or transform the friction/conflict.

5.                Facilitator

The broad intent behind the facilitator role is to help create a holding environment that can withstand the pressure of raising difficult issues which the team and those in friction and conflict need to deal with and to facilitate constructive interaction and communication that will lead to a positive and satisfactory outcome and relationship for the parties concerned.  The assumption here is that it is the task and responsibility of opposing parties to inquire into, resolve or transform the friction or conflict.  The facilitator is there to assist in this process not to take over responsibility for achieving it.

6.                Arbitrator

The role of arbitrator is often one of last resort for the manager rather than one to be engaged in early on as we are now entering the realm of formal quasi-legal interventions.  It gets activated when the parties in friction and conflict are unwilling or unable to take responsibility for, or to engage with each other in resolving or transforming it.  It is focused on sorting the problem or the conflict; not on applying sanctions or punishment for any offending behaviour, but it does hold a binding power requiring compliance on the parties involved usually stemming from the authority and responsibilities delegated to the manager as part of their organisational role.  The arbitration may in some cases be appealed to a higher authority and sanctions may follow for non-compliance with arbitration.  The role is not appropriate where the manager is party to the friction or conflict.  The manager is not neutral but is always acting in the light of the interests of their department or organisation as well as arbitrating between opposing parties.