Managing for Growth
www.asq.org/pub/jqp 25
Management techniques
focusing on communication
processes can help you avoid
disruptive team-based conflict.
Conflict Leadership Navigating Toward Effective
and Efficient Team Outcomes
Ana Shetach
Teams are becoming more common as workers join virtual, autono- mous, cross-functional, action-learning, and many other kinds of teams. By their very nature, working teams are poten- tial settings for varied professional as well as personal, ego-based conflicts. This article posits that management and team decisions, behaviors, and outcomes are a direct consequence of the nature of conflict-management—throughout overall team management and teamwork processes. It suggests easily applicable managerial techniques for harnessing conflict situations toward effective and efficient overall team results.
The following questions are discussed as well as some proposed insights:
• Can you learn processes and acquire skills to produce increasingly efficient and effective team results?
• What are potentially positive conflicts?
• What makes the difference between positive and negative conflict outcomes?
• How can you develop conflict- management skills?
• What is the role of team leadership in positive conflict navigation?
This article also considers the issue of interests and intentions underlying the management of conflict situations during the various stages of team leadership, within and among organi- zational units and teams. It provides insights to support the argument that team decisions, behaviors, and out- comes, are a direct consequence of how well conflicts are handled throughout the overall team process.
The Nature of Conflict Conflicts within working teams—
often stemming from differences of opinions or incongruent interests—are fairly common. In particular, teamwork settings associated with assignment and project processes create suitable condi- tions for conflicts. Their nature, depth, complexity, the rate of the partners’ involvement in those situations, and, especially, how well the conflicts are handled may all have a significant effect on the overall, ultimate results of the associated projects.
Handling conflict always has been a central factor in human life and history that determined the consequences of the particular venture. This applies to
The Journal for QualiTy & ParTiciPaTion July 201226
all levels of human existence, whether political, organizational, or personal. Human nature, on a basic behavioral level, has not changed. Conflicts, with their direct and indirect consequences, still continue to affect the results of our doings on a day-to-day basis, thus impacting our lives. Within organizational settings, the fashion by which con- flicts are managed has a direct impact on the overall directions taken by management and teams.1
Conflict is a normal state of affairs and is neither negative nor positive by nature. For the purpose of this article it is defined as “differences of opinions and/or contradiction of interests among two or more people, parties, or factors” (departments, organizations, nations, etc.). This definition is based on the assumption that differences among human beings present themselves continuously in all communication settings due to the following two basic reasons:
• First, interpersonal differences exist on every possible dimension—age, sex, race, looks, feel- ings, education, upbringing, experience, attitude, opinions, cultures, nations, religion, etc.
• Second, contradictory interests often are due to the affiliation of people with differing cultures, positions, roles, status, and hierarchy levels. They also are a result of association and/or commitment to a specific firm, department, organization, level, group, country, culture, religion, etc. On a deeper level, another factor might be people’s personal ego needs.
Conflicts are assumed to arise consistently among human beings who work with each other in any setting on the basis of one or both of the above reasons.1 Whether the disagreement and/ or the contradiction of interests will be dealt with constructively or steered in a destructive direction depends on the parties involved and how they handle and manage the situation. This is particu- larly critical in teamwork and project settings, where effectively handling each team assignment may affect or even determine ultimate success.
When two parties are communicating and a conflict occurs, as long as both sides continue to concentrate on the issue, they are headed toward a satisfactory solution. As they do their best not to get personally involved—and thereby lose their ability to clearly see their mutual objectives and interests—the process is bound to be resolved constructively. The same is true for managing
any discussion within a team regarding any issue or mutual interest. Keeping the discussion on a matter-of-course level increases the probability of a high-level, creative solution that is acceptable to all parties involved. Additionally, it ensures a cooperative relationship among the parties for the involvement of all in the future progress of the project.
Politics and power play a major role among people in any setting or level at work. The condi- tions for personally evoked emotional conflicts abound in team settings. Such conditions may include the following:
• As members of workgroups promote their ideas and opinions at decision-making stages.
• When highly cooperative activities are needed during implementation stages.
• During times of pressure-filled deadlines.
• When various stakeholders have high expecta- tions for the team.
People who are able to develop their awareness and focus on their personal position vis-à-vis the conflict-evolvement process have a higher chance of controlling the direction in which the conflict will evolve and, therefore, effectively direct the final result of the process.
Team Management and Conflict Leadership Managing teams is a highly complex assignment,
often involving high organizational stakes and expectations, vast financial investments, involve- ment of numerous factors/stakeholders, and the ability to handle professionally heterogenic and diversified teams.
Yet, at the bottom line, everyday assignments and long-term projects are about attaining two basic objectives: arriving at optimal decisions and implementing them efficiently, toward obtain- ing goals and destinations.2 Figure 1 (as well as Figure 4A) shows this basic conceptualization of team management.
Project Decision-Making Processes Adizes proposes that managers can be cat-
egorized according to their capability to view, analyze, and understand situations, problems, and assignments.2 These different outlooks deter- mine their managerial styles. The four critical factors by which managers can be categorized include the following:
www.asq.org/pub/jqp 27
• P—Doer, performer, seeing the world in con- crete terms
• A—Organizer, bureaucrat, by-the-rules person
• E—Entrepreneur, creative, full-spectrum (macro) points of view, long-term perspective
• I—A people person, natural facilitator, good communications
A person’s managerial style is composed of a different combination of these four traits. Each manager could be stronger in some of these traits and weaker in the others. The managerial capabili- ties constitute four different managerial dimensions or points of view. Combined, they create a whole multidimensional perspective on any issue. No one individual, according to Adizes, is capable of a bal- anced perspective at all times, or for a long time, regarding all situations. Team thinking and team planning are often required, especially in complex processes, such as project management. All four aspects of thinking are necessary to produce quali- tative and workable decisions. Decisions, which are both qualitative and workable, require all of the aforementioned four capabilities: concrete and practical planning, organizational perspectives, a long-term creative and macro initiative, and people-oriented thinking.
Conflicts naturally arise when people with dif- ferent managerial personalities are discussing an issue or an assignment. Different points of view and opinions are essential for problem-solving and decision-making practices within projects. They inspire and eventually bring about creative, quality solutions. The process by which these solu- tions are derived is bound to be complex, however. It will inevitably be “conflictual.” Whether these conflicts will eventually contribute better solu- tions to problems and excellent project results, rather than accelerating toward disastrous situa- tions, depends on how they are handled. Thus, the effective management of team decision-making
processes requires high-level conflict-resolution awareness and skills to promote the required collaboration among decision makers to make quality decisions.
Adizes’ basic managerial conception (see Figure 1) implies that decision-making processes are cardinal in project management, but that without efficient implementation processes, proj- ects may risk not materializing as expected.
Team Implementation Processes One of the critical managerial acts that can help
overcome difficulties that may arise within teams during management processes of assignments and projects is the preliminary “mapping-out” of processes. This singles out in advance the potential difficulties and conflicts that may sur- face throughout the project. Shetach3 proposes Adizes’ “CAPI” model4 as an efficient tool for this pre-mapping analysis (see Figure 2). CAPI stands for coalesced authority, power, and influence. It is believed that to manage assignments and projects effectively and efficiently, leading them toward successful completion, it is essential to coalesce these three forces (or energy sources.)4 Coalescing these forces implies getting all the stakeholder representatives to collaborate in managing the project from its beginning to the end. This is nec- essary to ensure efficient implementation of all subsequent decisions and actions.
The CAPI model does this primarily by shed- ding light on all potential conflict zones and junctions and by proposing the optimal processes
Figure 1: The Goals of Management
Management
Ef�cient Implementation of Decisions
Effective Decision Making
Adizes, 2004
Figure 2: The “CAPI” Model
AUTHORITY A
POWER (of Cooperation)
P C
INFLUENCE I
The Journal for QualiTy & ParTiciPaTion July 201228
for extracting better solutions and higher levels of support and cooperation in those potentially hazardous situations. These opti- mal processes ensure both the quality of the decisions taken within the project and the smooth process of their implementation. This applies whether the decision is a solu- tion to a problem within a project or the promotion of a project as a whole. The ele- ments within this tool are elaborated in the following:
• The factor of “authority”—The CAPI model advises users to verify in advance whether the project manager has the full authority to act independently upon decisions taken within the project. Likewise, any particular deci- sion regarding a specific aspect of the project requires a similar advance verification to ensure its efficient implementation.
• The factor of “power of cooperation”—To ensure maximum success in any decision, the CAPI model recommends taking initial steps to ensure full cooperation of all “power holders” in the future. This ensures that cooperators have the necessary know-how and/or capabili- ties and/or resources as well as the willingness and interest to cooperate. In politics these steps are termed “lobbying” or getting your potential cooperators to willingly and fully cooperate when their cooperation is needed in the future.
• The factor of “influence or information”—You should also make sure in advance that the decision you are taking is a qualitative, suit- able, and workable one; otherwise you might discover (often too late), that the decision was not based on the full volume of data regarding:
• The nature of the assignment/project and/or its objectives.
• The relevant environment within which it prevails.
• The limitations and constraints on its “smooth” application.
• The resources available for the project (budget, manpower etc.).
A CAPI team includes the figure of authority, representatives of all cooperating factors, and all the people who have the necessary know-how and expertise to solve the problems and arrive at qual- ity decisions. Such a composition of assignment/ project teams ensures on one hand both quality decisions and efficient implementation processes. On the other hand, it is bound to evoke profound differences of opinions and contradictory inter- ests among its members. CAPI teams are potential settings for varied and profound professional, as well as personal, ego-based conflicts.
To maximize efficient implementation, the CAPI model is coupled with the Revised Decision-Square model (RDSM).5 The RDSM provides team managers with simple techniques to ensure efficient follow-up and control during decision-implementation processes throughout the project. This tool minimizes destructive ego-evoked conflicts and maximizes smooth, cooperative implementations.
It collapses all the possible variety of decision aspects into four categories that constitute the four sides of a square. Those decision aspects include the goals, a detailed operative descrip- tion of the final project/decision results, a detailed implementation timetable, resources
Figure 3: The Decision-Square Model—An Elaborated Example
WHAT
HOW WHO Sarah
WHEN March 11
10:00-11:00
Decision A clear and detailed list of assignments for each team member: John:...... Sarah:..... Ruth:......
A detailed list of resources (including plans for obtaining them)
– Project/decision goals – Manifested operative description – Schedule for application: March 15 April 2 May 1
www.asq.org/pub/jqp 29
and processes for their attain- ment, and the distribution of assignments among committee members, as well as agreed-upon dates for future follow-up meet- ings of the team/committee. It also includes the name of the team-nominated project/decision coordinator. Figure 3 presents a detailed RDSM.
The RDSM states that the more thoroughly, clearly, and unequivocally you “seal” (specify in detail) all decision aspects, the better your chance of efficient implementation. It recommends sealing at least one decision square regarding that task or proj- ect before the end of every team meeting. Usually, more than one will be appropriate (e.g., a square per each topic or aspect of the overall issue or project aspect).
This tool touches on extremely basic issues, such as tying up all loose ends, ensuring clear and unambiguous communi- cations within teams, setting follow-up meetings and dates, etc. Following the RDSM lead has significance in limiting situations that may evoke un- necessary conflicts centering on various misunderstandings, power struggles, and interper- sonal differences.
The potential contribution of the CAPI model, coupled with the RDSM, is the combined abil- ity to lead managers and teams through a comparatively safe route to successful assignment/ project finalization and achieve- ments. The two models meet this objective by maximizing opportunities for constructive and potentially creative conflict resolution processes while simul- taneously minimizing time- and energy-consuming conflicts.
Figure 4: The Interwoven Team-Leadership—Conflict-Management Model (TLCM)
Management
Con�icts
A Taking Quality Decisions Ef�cient Implementation
of the Decisions
CAPI Teams
Contradictory Interests
PAEI Complementary Teams
Different Points of View
Management
Management of Con�icts
B Taking Quality Decisions Ef�cient Implementation
of the Decisions
CAPI Teams
Contradictory Interests
PAEI Complementary Teams
Different Points of View
Management
Management of Con�icts
C Taking Quality Decisions Ef�cient Implementation
of the Decisions
CAPI Teams
Contradictory Interests
PAEI Complementary Teams
Different Points of View
De�ning clear agreed-upon
goals
A tight “sealing” of all “decision
squares”
Matter-of-course (rather than
personal-level) discussion
Ef�cient management of team decision-
making processes
Identifying the appropriate con�ict- coping style for the particular situation
Based on Adizes, 1992, 2004, 2011
The Journal for QualiTy & ParTiciPaTion July 201230
The Interwoven Team-Leadership— Conflict-Management Model
Team management, in all its complexity and variations, is basically about the efficient han- dling of conflict situations. Figure 4 illustrates this notion. Team leadership is intertwined with conflict management as follows:
• The management of teamwork, assignments, and projects is about effective and efficient decision-making and decision-implementation processes.
• Decision-making processes are about cre- ative team processes, which are based on the “richness” of variations in team members’ interpersonal and professional know-how and experiences along with their differing points of view.
• Decision-implementation processes are about handling conflicts, which tend to center on various misunderstandings, power struggles, and interpersonal differences in the inter- pretation of details within decisions and instructions, etc.
Figure 4C points out possible directions and tools that can efficiently direct the positive han- dling of conflict situations toward creative and suitable goal-oriented solutions and the promo- tion of overall successful team results:
• Defining a clear set of project and sub-project goals, testing, and retesting them at every junc- tion for handling dilemma and conflict along the project process.
• Trying to handle conflict situations on a matter- of-course level (rather than letting them deteri- orate toward ego-controlled power struggles).
• Identifying suitable conflict-coping styles for attaining the destined goals within each and every particular conflict situation along the project process.
• Leading efficient and collaborated team decision- making processes.
• Tightly sealing each and every decision using the RDSM 5 approach.
Summary Successful team management, regardless of
the content or professional occupation involved, is about extracting and maximizing the potential essence of conflicts and of conflict situations within teams. Communication processes within teams are inlaid with conflicts—potential under- lying differences, as well as overt contradictions of opinions and interests. Monitoring those and navigating toward desirable results is mastering team leadership to perfection.
References 1. Ana Shetach, “The Four-Dimensions Model: A Tool for Effective Conflict Management,” Journal of International Studies of Management and Organization, Fall 2009, pp. 82-106.
2. Ichak Adizes, Leading the Leaders: How to Enrich Your Style of Management and Handle People Whose Style is Different From Yours, The Adizes Institute Publishing, 2004.
3. Ana Shetach, “Obstacles to Successful Management of Projects and Decision and Tips for Coping With Them,” Team Performance Management, Fall 2010, pp. 329-342.
4. Ichak Adizes, Mastering Change, The Adizes Institute Publishing, 1992.
5. Ana Shetach, “The Revised Decision-Square Model (RDSM): A Tool for Effective Decision-Implementation in Teams,” Team Performance Management, Spring 2009, pp. 7-17.
Ana Shetach Ana Shetach is an organizational consultant specializing in team processes and team development. She works with management groups, teams, and individual managers, focusing on strategically effective decision-making and decision-implementation processes. A resident of Haifa, Israel, Shetach is also currently lecturing in The Max-Stern Academic College of Emek-Yezreel. Contact Shetach at shetachf@netvision.net.il.
Copyright of Journal for Quality & Participation is the property of American Society for Quality, Inc. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.