Every organization, regardless of its size will periodically experience conflict between and amongst the team members. The success or otherwise of that entity will depend greatly on how effectively it is able to handle such conflicts when they arise.
This article describes a time tested strategy successfully used by decision makers in a large corporate multinational, to ensure timely resolution of conflicts.

People Differ & May Therefore Not Always Agree

Most organizations assign employees to different departments or sections based on their experience level, skills set, qualifications and sometimes their development needs.

This implies that any point in time you may have people from very different backgrounds, and vocational dispositions having to work together.

Since human beings have different personalities, it is not unexpected that disagreements in the course of doing their jobs may arise. When they do, not everyone involved or affected will be prepared to be see things from the other person’s perspective.

As a result, over time issues raised may not get resolved.

One Example

Two line managers on the same management grade who disagree on how the factory operatives should be assigned duties could as a result grow to resent one another.

If not addressed, this interpersonal conflict could spill over and negatively affect the progress of the department as a whole.

For instance, one manager could work morning shift and passes instructions for an important process to be carried out according to his preferred method. If it happens that his counterpart takes over the next shift, he (or she) could choose to change those instructions to suit his (or her) preferred approach.

Depending on how sensitive the concerned operatrion is, time delays or errors in processing could occur as a result of the conflicting instructions passed to the men on the shop floor. And the department could consequently record a shortfall in output of finished product for the day, week or month.

It could even be worse.

For instance, if the line managers fail to manage their disagreements properly, the operatives working with them could detect they are not on the best of terms.

Mischievious ones amongst them could tactfully exploit the situation to their advantage e.g. by playing up negative aspects of the actions of one manager to the other one, with the intention of reaping favours from either or both sides! (I’ve seen this happen).

It is possible that at some point the other members of the team could begin taking sides with their bickering colleagues or superiors.

Suddenly, in one department, you would have two camps. And instead of working together to achieve their mutual objective as defined by top management, they could spend their time competing unnecessarily.

Top Management Needs To Be Alert To The Signs

Ironically, it can be quite difficult for people at the top to detect that this problem exists in a department or section in their company. Quite often, the conflicting reports and erratic performances (of what may have previously been a top performing unit) gets interpreted to be an individual’s laziness or lack of seriousness.

Experienced managers, patient and painstaking enough to carefully investigate the situation can however discover the root cause.

And when they do, if they are familiar with it, they will readily adopt the use of a “Work Out Session” to resolve the problem.

What a Work out Session Entails

Simply put, this is a meeting of ALL the members of a department, section, unit, plant or function, regardless of position, experience or age. Everyone of them is compelled to attend this meeting during which time all attendees will be free to voice whatever issues they have.

The convener of the meeting – often a superior who identified the root cause – or the department head who has been advised of the possible cause – will table the poor performance of the unit.

Her message will be that all attendees state what they believe to be the cause of the problem(s). All contributions will be listed on a white board or flip chart sheet. Then she will ask the group to proffer solutions to EACH one of the listed problems or issues, until the last is so treated.

Members who have differing opinions will be asked to voice them else it would be assumed they agree that the solutions proposed are workable. And by implication, they would be prepared to cooperate with other members of the team, as necessary, to implement them.

Final Words: Reaching Agreements & Taking Actions Based on Them

By the end of the meeting, any warring parties would have been made to discuss and resolve their differences.

A minutes taker would document detailed proceedings in writing, and print/circulate copies to every attendee. Special effort would be made to indicate specific actions agreed, and the individuals responsible for making them happen.

This document would be used by the meeting convener or the department head to follow up implementation of all the outstanding tasks relating to the action plan agreed.

Very rarely does this strategy fail to work, if all concerned are diligent and commited.

That’s why any company that uses it regularly is very likely to enjoy prolonged periods of zero (or minimal) conflict in its workplaces.