The Limits of Conflict Management Training

Interpersonal conflict resolution is often an area that clients want to discuss. Generally, the topic is approached because of a specific work team that is going through a highly conflictive stage. Many times the issue is presented to me through a question like, “Do you think we can improve the situation by providing interpersonal conflict management skills training?”

I have a very strong belief in the value and importance of providing training within an organization. For example, I have found that providing skills training in conflict management to new supervisors can have substantial payoffs to the organization. However, there are many situations where I do not believe that training is the answer to the problem. Using training in an attempt to reduce the conflictiveness of a work team is one of those areas.

Yes, it is often true that individual team members can benefit from the conflict management training. I am very well aware of programs that I think have value for the individual. For example, it is reasonably easy to structure a training program around the book Getting Together by Fisher and Brown. I still use this book in one of my graduate level courses and have always found it to be a very helpful guide on successful strategies and tactics for dealing with conflict and conflictive situations. The essence of the book is to teach the skill of “unconditionally constructive behavior.” The views that are set out in the book have nothing to do with being nice but rather focus on the important life lesson that conditioning your constructiveness on the behavior of another is to your detriment. Why let someone else decide whether you will act constructively or destructively?

Now I believe that there is value in providing training on unconditional constructive behavior for members of a highly conflictive work team, but the impact of this training on team alignment and cohesiveness will probably be small. The fact is that improving individual behavior does not generally bring around a re-orientation of the team as a whole. That issue needs to be confronted directly in a process that is different than simply providing a training program. I have had the opportunity in the last couple of years to witness a number of teams that have successfully gone through significant, positive realignment. There are four basic elements in the work that I do to bring about this alignment. These elements are outlined as follows:

• The vast majority of employees in a work group that is conflictive would prefer to be on a different track. The stress that the conflict creates on their personal lives and the negative impact on performance is the motivator for change. When provided a viable method for improving the work environment, employees will usually make this choice particularly when given the opportunity to make the choice as a group.

• The most effective approach is to have the group focus on creating what it wants. A far less productive approach is to have the group focus on what it wants to get rid of. This latter approach frequently generates ill will and finger pointing behavior. The basic concept is to facilitate a process that will help create a positive, affirming culture.

• A team culture is grown, not imposed. Since it is grown the group must learn to develop processes for nurturing the desired culture. Without these processes, the affirming culture can easily die. My approach to the group begins by taking it through an activity designed to clarify what is wanted. The second step is to help the group design the program by which it will bring about the desired culture.

• The final step is to build team commitment to what has been designed. The central message of this element is that our actions will speak louder than or words – how original. We need the commitment from every team member to honor what we have agreed to.

The bottom line is that all too often having individual team members grow in their personal skills does not address the needs of the team to grow as a team. Good training is helpful for the development of personal skills. However, a facilitated process, which may incorporate some training, is the only program that I have seen move a whole team forward. If a work group has relationship problems, then those problems need to be addressed as a team.

Continue reading...

Managing the Dysfunctional Employee

I was recently asked to make a presentation at an annual conference for public sector human resource management professionals. Specifically, I was asked to speak on the topic of Managing the Dysfunctional Employee. I thought it might be useful to those of you who receive this e-zine for me to repeat some of the key points made in that presentation. Obviously, the first place to start is with the point that dysfunction is a broad, difficult and ambiguous topic. That being said, I offer the following points.

1. As an arbitrator, I have always made a distinction between a discipline and/or a discharge case involving a matter of misconduct as opposed to unacceptable performance. One of the practical distinctions between the two is the extent to which the employer expects an immediate behavior change versus a situation where the employee is expected to grow into the ability to perform. For example, if you have an employee that you can prove is stealing from you or sleeping on the job, it is not likely that you will tell the employee that he or she has sixty days to stop stealing or stop sleeping on the job. To put the matter differently, with misconduct the employer has the right to insist on an immediate change in behavior and, if such a change is not forthcoming, to move to discipline including discharge. On the other hand, if the quality or timeliness of an employee’s work is substandard, it is reasonable to expect that the employer will provide a period of time and some assistance to help the employee develop the ability to meet performance requirements. Growing new skills or attitudes clearly takes time.
   
   
2. Most often, the “dysfunctional employee” is a performance problem, not a matter of misconduct. If the employee’s inappropriate behavior was a matter of misconduct, the situation would be clearer and more easily dealt with. A path could be started that would quickly lead to discharge if the employee failed to stop the undesired behavior. Because it is a performance problem, however, what most employers find themselves doing is attempting to coach the employee to bring about a change in performance, usually with little success (otherwise we probably would not use the word “dysfunctional”)
   
   
3. How then do you work with the employee to make a change? I always recommend starting with a positive approach and then moving to formal discipline, if that is necessary. One such approach, that I believe is often overlooked, is to focus on the culture of the employee’s work team. Is it a strong, positive culture that may be able, with the right processes, to reach out and draw the employee into compliance? This idea is the main focus of a new workbook that Martie Geltz and I have recently released called Supervisor’s Guide to Cultivating a Positive Culture (available at 800-807-6544).
   
   
4. Unfortunately, what marks or distinguishes a dysfunctional employee is that he or she is often resistant to positive performance change processes. Moreover, there is a negotiating principle that I find important when addressing the issue of a dysfunctional employee: offers of reasonableness, kindness and cooperation are often viewed as a weakness to be exploited or viewed as a subterfuge for an underlying hostile intent. Thus offers of collaboration are met with increased demands or hostility. As a result, any attempt to be conciliatory is useless unless it is framed within a context of what the employer will not do or accept – you must be able to say “no” with authority.
   
   
5. Since employee dysfunction is often exhibited through a game that is played with the employer, I believe that it is absolutely essential for each employer’s handbook to clearly enunciate positive expectations. For example, employees should be expected to interact positively with other employees, to be productive, to work in a manner that encourages productiveness on the part of other employees and to demonstrate concern about the safety and well-being of individuals that are being provided services. Check your employee handbook, your employee orientation program and your training programs to make sure that the emphasis on affirmative responsibilities is in balance with the emphasis on specific behaviors that are prohibited. Yes, you can terminate the employment of a highly productive employee who makes life miserable for other employees. You need to make sure, however, that employees cannot hide behind the phrase, “I do my job.”
   
   
6. One last thought, as depressing as it sometimes is and as much as you might want to reach out and provide assistance to an employee in distress, years of arbitrating cases and listening to expert testimony leads me to the conclusion that for some the only real change occurs when they hit rock bottom. The termination of employment is often one necessary step towards hitting rock bottom. Moreover, the failure to timely implement the termination often simply prolongs the issue and makes life miserable for management and fellow employees.

Continue reading...