Successful team members can effectively manage conflict. This ability is considered a core competency and is required of employees who want to grow and advance. Unfortunately, it is also one of the most difficult skills an employee can develop.

Objective
The objective of this white paper is to illustrate team conflict symptoms and causes; to determine how to address team conflict using specific tools, skills, and processes; and to improve the ability of employees and management to build teams that can deal effectively with both healthy and unhealthy conflict.

The Context
Groups in the work place are very normal these days.  They consist of many different types of people working with others they normally would not interact with during their normal life style. This can be a very effective way of getting a project done.  However, the potential for conflict in development projects that use interdependency as a way to achieve results is extremely high.  Because it involves individuals from different backgrounds and orientations working together to complete a common task, the cause of conflict can stem from a variety of sources.  This includes differences in values, attitudes, needs, expectations, perceptions, resources, and personalities.  Thus, this is the most obvious down side to a team atmosphere.   Issues can evolve that slow the project or even completely stop the progression of the ultimate goal. 

Although other definitions of groups exist, we draw from the field of sociology and define a group as two or more freely interacting individuals who share collective norms and goals and have a common identity. - Group Dynamics © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2003

Conflict management is a very important part of team dynamics.  As a prerequisite, choosing members for a group can be a great way to prevent some of these issues as well.  One strategy involves designating a Project Manager, a strong individual that can competently take charge.  A successful Project Manager must be equipped to deal with the human factor and interpersonal dynamics of a project team.  They must have prepared strategies to allow the team to communicate effectively, create rapport, resolve conflict, lead team members, and motivate the whole team.   

It has been found that male and female employees often work in groups together. This brings one of the major conflicts to mind, Sexual Harassment.  In this day and age, this is nothing to joke about. People have lost careers over jokes and what they thought was just humor. There are many workshops and classes for this conflict. Many companies have some training devoted to Sexual Harassment in its initial training requirements. Work group diversity should go beyond gender, race, ethnicity and culture. Groups are found to be strong when they hold these values high, because they offer a wide spectrum of experience in which to draw from.

Allen C. Amason, of Mississippi State University, has studied conflict and its role in decision-making. He suggests there are two types of conflict:

Cognitive - conflict aimed at issues, ideas, principles, or process.
Affective - conflict aimed at people, emotions, or values.

His studies showed the presence of both types in any group setting; but he's clear to explain that cognitive conflict is constructive, while affective conflict is destructive (Brockmann, 1996).  Another researcher, Thomas K. Capozzoli (1995), reinforces this by describing the outcomes of constructive and destructive conflict:

Constructive conflicts exists when…

1. People change and grow personally from the conflict
2. The conflict results in a solution to a problem
3. It increases involvement of everyone affected by the conflict
4. It builds cohesiveness among the members of the team

 

Destructive conflicts exists when…

1. No decision is reached and problem still exists
2. It diverts energy away from more value-add activities
3. It destroys the morale of the team members
4. It polarizes or divides the team

Fifty-eight percent knuckled under to the “immoral majority” at least twice. Hence, the Asch effect, the distortion of individual judgment by a unanimous but incorrect opposition, was documented. (Do you ever turn your back on your better judgment by giving in to group pressure?) – Group Dynamics © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2003

More and more, teams represent an important change in the way we work.  There is the theory that through the interdependency of players, there is a greater productivity achieved by the whole.  However, the reality is not as promising.  The most common reason teams fail to meet performance expectations is their paralysis through unresolved conflict.   Many teams resort to mediation, a process in which a third party serves an evaluative and sometimes decision-making function, when traditional teams come to an impasse.  However, even this sometimes creates problems.  There are some mentalities that need to be overcome.  There needs to be ground rules where coercion, threats, giving in, no holds barred, going to battle, and other strategies for winning at all costs are not legitimate means for reaching resolution.  Individuals who are competitive often resort to these tactics, making teamwork more destructive than it is worth.

No matter how much planning goes into the group preparation, things can go haywire. As long as the reward is great or there will be job advancement in your future these problems tend to fade away. Happy and well trained employees make good employees.

Works Sited
The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2003 Group Dynamics ©

Brockmann, Erich. (1996, May). Removing the paradox of conflict from group decisions.

Academy of Management Executive. v10n2, p. 61-62.

Guidi, Marilyn A. (1995, Oct). Peer-to-Peer accountability. Nursing Management.
v26n10, p 48.

Cappozzoli, Thomas K. (1995, Dec). Resolving conflict within teams. Journal for Quality and Participation. v18n7, p. 28-30.

Sessa, Valerie I. (1996, Mar). Using perspective taking to manage conflict in teams. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. v32n1, p. 101-115.

Team Conflict How to Manage It - Cindy Phillips Johns Hopkins University Group Development & Change 10/21/97