9 Things To Do When There Is Conflict in Your Meeting

Conflict can kill progress. And for my students, conflict is one of their biggest worries. Here is what you can do to transform conflict into cooperation in your next meeting.

1. Get your mind in the right frame of mind. I like to reframe the meaning of conflict by asking myself, is this conflict a symptom that the status quo is not working?  If there is good faith in the room, then consider asking meeting participants to talk about what is the unmet need that is behind the conflict. Usually, a simple, open-ended question will open this discovery conversation; a question like, “Hold off advocating for a moment. Tell me what is behind your concern.  What’s not working now that if resolved could let you agree to the course of action we are talking about in this meeting?”

2. Diagnose first, intervene second. When that discovery conversation gets going, do your best ‘active listening’ to see if you can name the underlying concern. Don’t rush to a solution. Diagnose first by looking for these common sources of the conflict.

• Poor role clarification (who is responsible for what task or what part of a project).
• Poor processes (the right hand is disconnected from the left hand).
• Communication problems (messages are not being heard or respected).
• Lack of performance standards/job expectations (poor clarity or agreement). 
• Lack of resources (not enough money, materials, staff, and other assets or too much competition for these resources). 
• Unreasonable time constraints (deadlines not stated, confused, or unstable).
• Fear/resistance to change (fear of the unknown).
• Toxic work environment (competition, bullying, distrust, etc.).
• Personality differences (lack of respect and tolerance).
• And more…(that’s why you are actively listening!).

3. Negotiate the terms of the conversation. Often a conflict in a meeting takes a life of its own—organically evolving but in a dysfunctional way. Instill some control. Have the participants negotiate both the way they speak to one another and a mutual commitment to finding a joint (collaborative) solution. Conflict in my meetings is often eased because the group agreed to the rules on how to talk to one another and a peer-to-peer pledge to find a common ground. 

4. Adjust the scope of the conversation. Frequently, people talking past one another are doing so because they are having different conversations. Get the group to confirm that they are focused on the right end-point (objectives) and are talking about the correct array of elements needing resolution to get to that end-point. If the group is too zoomed in on a narrow subset of details, too broad, or focused on different subjects take a step back and define the scope of the conversation. 

5. Develop empathy. “I want…” comments are common in a conflict conversation, although they are usually stated in more diplomatic terms. Behind ‘wants’ are, usually, unmet needs. Build positive relationships between adversaries by getting them to better understand where each other is coming from and what they’re trying to achieve. Armed with a deeper understanding people are more likely to be empathetic to one another. Do that with a conversation about needs not wants.

6. Say back what you heard. Counterparts may be bickering because they are listening only to decide what they want to say next instead of listening to understand one another. I am routinely successful when I interject a facilitator’s request that the parties with the conflict summarize by repeating back what they heard each other say. This is a great way to respectfully force active listening. It does put people on the spot. So, you have to use facilitator diplomacy. But it does improve listening. I usually introduce this facilitator’s request with a phrasing that says I am seeking communication clarity, not criticizing. A phrasing that works for me is something like, “To make sure we are clear about what’s going on for everybody, I am going to ask you to summarize what the other person is saying. John, would you go first?  What do you hear Jane saying? ”  Then turn to Jane to summarize what she heard John say.

7. Change the conditions and negotiate the process. Whether it’s the location of the conversation or the rules that are brought to the table, conditions matter. Shape the environment of the conversation for success with a seating arrangement that equalizes power and provides safety for a difficult conversation. And establish an expectation that the purpose of the conversation is to co-create a workable solution for everyone, not win. In other words, set up a power balance and a shared responsibility for collaboration and compromise.

8. Establish the right decision-making standard; use ‘Good Enough for Now, Safe Enough to Try.’  People in conflict have an instinct to seek a perfect solution—for themselves, not the other party. But people who are about ready to take a risk and try something new to end their conflict need safety at the same time. If you, as the facilitator, are silent about what decision standard to use in crafting a collaborative solution, everyone will define it differently for themselves. Facilitate a conversation to encourage a ‘Good Enough for Now, Safe Enough to Try’ standard for the meeting.

9. Require that the parties make offers. Most conflicts I encounter in meetings involve people sparing over competing ideas. The debate quickly moves to each side trying to either prove the other is wrong or that their idea is superior. Create a pathway out of this blocking behavior by asking the parties, one at a time, to make an offer to resolve the issue in a way that will meet everyone’s needs. And here is where Tip Number 8 kicks in. The offers do not have to be perfect. Enforce the ‘Good Enough’ standard. The best question I use to ask for these offers is, “What do you most want to see happen that will work for you and everyone else at the same time that is good enough for now?”

- - - - -

Conflict is not something to avoid at all costs. Conflict can be the quickest and best way to make creative progress because it does not ignore the issue hoping it will go away. You certainly don't want everyone automatically saying, "Yes" to everything without proper discussion because that is the way to expose problems with the status quo! Facilitating conflict starts with your next meeting. Use these steps to navigate and, in so doing, make one of the most valuable contributions a facilitator can make to help teams succeed. 
____________
© 2024, Michael E. Fraidenburg. All rights reserved.

Managing Three Types of Conflict

 

Three types of conflict are common; task conflict, relationship conflict, and values conflict. Here is how to recognize these and tactics anyone can use to deal with them.

Task Conflict

Task conflict often involves concrete issues related to work assignments or promises about who will do what.

They can include disputes about how to divide up resources, differences of opinion on procedures and policies, differing expectations about work, judgments and interpretation of facts, and different opinions about the quality standards.

Task conflict is usually the simplest to resolve. Two interventions are worth trying.

First is to facilitate a negotiation between the parties to ‘write’ a new, unambiguous list of agreements about the points in conflict. This can be done through active listening, which involves asking questions, repeating back what you hear to confirm your understanding, and asking even deeper questions aimed at probing for deeper concerns. Try to engage the parties in a collaborative problem-solving process in which they brainstorm workable solutions. When parties develop solutions together, rather than having an outcome imposed on them, they are more likely to abide by the agreement and get along better in the future.

Second, if it is not possible to resolve all points of disagreement, create a separate list of these for either future work or to hand them off to someone else to decide. It can help to host a future negotiation after the heat of the moment has passed or have the organization’s leaders serve as de facto mediators or decision makers on the unresolved issues. 

But task conflict often turns out to have deeper roots and more complexity than it appears at first glance. For example, coworkers who are arguing about which one of them should go to an out-of-town conference may have a deeper conflict based on a sense of rivalry—bringing us to…

Relationship Conflict

Relationship conflict arises from differences in ambition, personality, style, matters of taste, and even conflict styles. While it can be difficult and uncomfortable, conflict in a relationship is not always a bad thing. When it is healthy and productive, relationship conflict presents an opportunity for people to learn about how others see and experience the world.

Before a relationship conflict kills a relationship, you might invite the participants out, one at a time, to a private conversation and try to get to know them and their dispute better. After that consider a joint meeting with the parties. Discovering things that they have in common—whether a tie to the same city, social issue, work objective, or shared concerns about problems in your organization—may give you common ground you can use to bring the people together.

In this conversation resist urges the parties may have to argue or defend their position. This conversation is a search for common ground. With common ground identified there is a chance the parties can co-create a future where they can work together to create that benefit. Along the way in this conversation demonstrate empathy and interest, and the parties are more likely to reciprocate. If the conflict persists or worsens, another option is to enlist the help of a manager in resolving your differences.

But relationship conflict often turns out to have deeper roots as well, bringing us to…

Value Conflict

Value conflict can arise from fundamental differences in identities, which can include differences in world-view, politics, religion, ethics, norms, and other deeply held beliefs. Although discussion of politics and religion is often taboo in the workplace, disputes about values can arise in other contexts such as whether to implement an affirmative action program or whether to work with a client with a bad reputation.

Disputes involving values tend to heighten defensiveness, distrust, and alienation. Parties can feel so strongly about standing by their values that they reject compromises that would satisfy other interests they might have.

For a solution facilitate a process of reframing a values-based dispute by appealing to other values that the parties share. Let me explain.

A critical first step in seeking to resolve a values-based dispute is to guide the conversation away from demonization and toward mutual understanding and respect through dialogue. Aim for the parties accurately understanding each another’s point of view. This does not mean coming to an agreement about anything—this step is about creating understanding. This type of understanding doesn’t require ‘touchy-feely’ emotional sharing, though it will sometimes occur. It is only a ‘neutral’ ability to describe accurately what someone else believes about the situation.

The next step is to dig deeper with each party to understand a wider range of values they hold. For example, in a pattern I frequently see, the parties may complain that their value around the idea of fairness is violated. With more questions, they might also disclose values they hold about self-determination and freedom of choice. I might not succeed in asking the parties to compromise on fairness. But with that additional information I can ask them to proposal solutions they can both live with to meet their needs for self-determination and freedom of choice. Often that is enough to resolve the fairness issue.

- - - - -

Great leaders learn to recognize task, relationship, and values as distinct types of conflict that require distinct types of interventions.

A conflict may be uncomfortable but it provides valuable information that the status quo is not working. While conflict can be stressful, it can also act to ‘clear the air,’ surfacing issues that need discussion through your expert facilitation. In short, in the midst of conflict is opportunity.