APPROACH
Conflict in organizational and business settings occurs when two or more parties (individuals, groups, or departments) have incompatible interests, objectives, values, or perceptions, leading to disagreements and tensions.
It can manifest in various ways, such as communication difficulties, competition for resources, or discrepancies and delays in decision-making. This often affects team dynamics, productivity, and the work environment.
In the BANI context (Brittle, Anxious, Non-linear, Incomprehensible), conflict is part of organizational life. Thus, it is advisable to normalize its occurrence and develop mechanisms for both prevention and management.
To address conflict, it is important to de-dramatize it and focus on the dynamics that generate it rather than seeking blame. In our model, individuals are part of larger dynamics and act in a certain direction of which they are often unaware.
CAUSES OF CONFLICT
Identifying the root cause of conflict is crucial for effective intervention and resolution. Our model focuses on three main areas and proposes specific interventions for each case.
A. Culture.
This encompasses all psycho-dynamic aspects related to the environment and work styles. It originates from the organization’s history and unfolds in response to social changes, the market, and how the organization addresses the challenges it faces. Factors such as prominent founders and leaders, significant events, narratives, values, beliefs, relationship styles, types of leadership, levels of demand, work pace, and attitudes toward the future (optimism, pessimism, etc.) have a significant impact.
For example, when teams face excessive workloads or sustained pressure, tensions often arise that affect their ability to collaborate effectively. Additionally, the expectations and dedication to work are interpreted differently in the current (post-pandemic) context compared to previous times.
This area is quite intangible. The involved elements usually do not have an explicit presence in the organization. They are rarely discussed or described, yet they play a significant role in organizational life and condition both the emergence and management of conflict.
B. Structure.
This includes all aspects of organizational architecture, such as processes, procedures, project management, roles, and responsibilities. Unlike culture and environment, this area is tangible and evident. However, the rapid response and adaptation of organizations often hinder a clearer definition of these terms, leading to ambiguity and differences in interpretation.
For example, different interpretations of roles and responsibilities can lead to misunderstandings and conflicts, as team members may not clearly understand the extent of their authority or specific tasks. These dynamics can result in disagreements caused by overlapping work, gaps in responsibility, missed deadlines, etc.
C. People.
Individuals are not a neutral resource; they perform their roles according to their personality, experience, vision, attitude, and skills. The same position in the organizational chart can have a very different focus and expression depending on who occupies it.
Organizations have outsourced low-value functions, so employees who remain have a greater impact on short-, medium-, and long-term business outcomes. The complexity of work demands the formation of diverse teams. Differences in profiles are both a source of richness and a challenge. Variations in communication styles and ways of working are a common source of friction.
DIAGNOSIS
In conflict management, it is essential to identify the area from which the mismatch arises. Typically, there is not a single cause, but rather a root cause that has a higher impact. This will be where we focus our intervention.
This is why accurate diagnosis is so important. HR professionals have a keen understanding of these issues, and when they seek our services, they often have a finely tuned perspective. If this is not the case, we need to work on a preliminary diagnostic phase before intervening. To streamline this process, our diagnostic procedures focus on interviews with a representative sample of individuals. In some cases, we use more general questionnaires that allow us to quantify the presence of certain dynamics, behaviors, and moods.
A SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS
Let’s begin by recalling what a system is: it is a set of elements or components that interact or work together toward a common purpose. Therefore, all systems have three components: elements, purpose, and communication.
A company is a collection of interconnected and overlapping systems and subsystems.
A subsystem is a system that belongs to a larger one. A regional management team is, at once, a system in itself and a subsystem of the national sales management.
We say that systems are related when they must interact to achieve their purpose. The clearest example is the areas of the company (finance, sales, operations, purchasing, etc.), which need to relate, understand, and coordinate with each other to achieve strategic objectives.
We say that systems are overlapping when they intersect, meaning they have areas, functions, or processes that influence each other. For instance, within a company’s sales area, we often find different subsystems, such as the sales team and customer service team. Both overlap as they engage with the same customer at different times. Similarly, an individual, as a system, overlaps with the organization for which they work. We can see how a person’s emotional balance affects their professional performance, and thus their role. Their history, personality, and skills (their personal system) overlap with the team’s system they work in.
Once we diagnose the primary area from which the conflict originates, we must identify the systems that play a leading role—in other words, those that are either impacting or suffering the most due to the conflict. These will be the focus of our intervention. It is important to clarify that the same system can simultaneously be a cause or accelerator of conflict and a victim of it.
The degree of influence of each system determines the phases and timing of the intervention. In other words, we must always start with the system that has the greatest responsibility or impact on the conflict.
Let’s look at an example.
The client expresses concern about a situation. The logistics department is experiencing high turnover. Valuable employees are leaving the company, and their knowledge and experience are hard to replace.
The talent department, through exit interviews, has identified that the work environment is very detrimental. There is significant pressure to achieve what employees describe as unachievable goals. They are working long hours beyond established hours, with very poor results. It seems that despite their efforts, they cannot improve the situation. This frustration is what mainly drives many employees to decide to leave.
Upon investigating the problem, it becomes clear that the leader is very demanding of both themselves and others. They joined the company a year ago, and until then, had not held such a responsible position. They are valued for their technical knowledge, effort, dedication, and commitment to the company. However, employees complain about their style. They try to maintain a close and friendly relationship with the team, but when stressed (which happens often), they raise their tone excessively and apply too much pressure.
When analyzing the department’s context, it is observed that it has grown very rapidly over the past year and a half. The exponential growth in sales has led to a doubling of capacity in a very short time. In fact, it was this situation that led to the decision to hire a new manager. Previously, this role was managed by the operations director, aided by a coordinator.
The logistics director, aware of the problem, complains about a lack of resources. They say that the work procedures they have been using are very ineffective for the operational scale they are facing. This opinion is shared by their team and other members of the management committee.
In this case, it seems the causes of conflict originate in the areas of structure and people. Regarding structure, it appears that the updating of procedures is not keeping pace with the organization’s needs; in other words, the work systems have become outdated. On the other hand, in terms of people, we look at the department leader, who seems to be undergoing a learning curve in a role that is new to them. Their demands are leading to communication practices that negatively affect the team’s climate and motivation.
Based on this diagnosis, when we focus on the leading systems, we have the following:
Logistics Department. This system requires a review of its procedures at a much faster pace.
Logistics Manager. This person needs to reassess their management style to learn how to balance the level of pressure and acquire new communication strategies.
Logistics Team. The team itself shares a negative and harmful self-image. Failure, frustration, and distrust are taking a toll. If they are not already doing so, it is very likely they will start looking for someone to blame. It is essential to review their internal discourse and communication to empower themselves and take charge of managing the change they are experiencing.
If we ask ourselves where to start, it seems evident that we should first work with the department and its procedures while also focusing on the manager. In a second phase, we will address the entire logistics team. Why in this order? Because without a certain evolution in procedures and how the leader manages the team, their ability to initiate actions that signify change will be very limited.
TYPES OF INTERVENTION
Consulting.
This is aimed at solving management and knowledge issues to improve the structural area. It is specialized and specific advice aimed at enhancing autonomy and effectiveness.
Team Coaching (intra-team).
This provides a space for reflection and decision-making with the goal of sustainably accelerating the team’s evolution, allowing them to successfully respond to the challenges they face and become more resilient. It directly impacts the areas of culture and people.
Team Coaching (inter-team).
This offers a space for reflection and shared decision-making between two or more teams. The goal is to review work and communication dynamics to improve collaboration effectiveness. It directly impacts the cultural area.
Individual Coaching.
This is a private working space where individuals review their work methods and become aware of their areas for development. From here, they decide on the changes to implement, employing new, healthier, and more effective tools. This impacts the people area directly and the culture area indirectly.
Training.
This is a training space to acquire new concepts and tools that improve employees’ professionalism, autonomy, and well-being. It impacts all three areas (structure, culture, and people).
What interventions would we propose for the case we are working on as an example?
- Consulting for the evolution and improvement of processes and procedures in the department.
- Individual coaching for the department leader.
- Team coaching for the logistics team.
Phase 1
Actions A and B
Phase 2
Action C