team work 3

216� 1BSU��� t� 5FBN�1FSGPSNBODF

minted managers attended a five-week training program to help them learn to embrace and foster rigorous internal debates.104

With regard to conflict coaching, it is important to focus on content rather than style. In other words, focus on the substance, not the delivery. The most successful proj- ect teams are those that rise above style issues and focus on content.105 The focus on content, rather than style, is similar to the prescriptive advice of “separating the people from the problem.”106

Principle 4: Changing individuals will have its greatest impact only after the team design and team processes are addressed. People have a better chance of changing when the team design is optimal and the core team processes are positive, thereby serving to reinforce individual behavior.

INTERESTS, RIGHTS, AND POWER MODEL OF DISPUTING

According to the interests, rights, and power model, team members tend to use one of the following three methods to resolve disputes: interests-based arguments, rights-based arguments, or power-based arguments. A rights-based argument focuses on apply- ing some standard of fairness, precedent, contract, or law. A power-based approach is characterized by the use of force, intimidation, rank, or power. Avoidance is yet another option for team members. Collaborative styles of conflict management, such as constructive controversy, are more beneficial for team performance.107 An interest- based approach focuses on satisfying both parties’ core interests; when people set aside questions of right and wrong, they can sometimes craft terms that meet their most important interests but usually not all of them.

As an example of the difference between collaborating (interests) and contend- ing (i.e., rights- or power-based approaches) in teams, consider a team in which there has been a serious, long-standing conflict concerning the nature of the assignments given to team members. Some assignments are clearly regarded as more attractive and career-enhancing than others. However, for the organization to be successful, all assign- ments must be covered by the team. One of the members, Larry, begins a meeting by stating, “I am not at all happy with how the assignments for the project are handled. I consistently have to do the least attractive part of the project, and it is a lot of work. I want to be excused from that part of the project in the future.” Three team members might respond in the following ways, depending on which approach they take to the conflict at hand:

t�Collaborative (interests-based) response: “Larry, I’ve sensed that this is of great concern to you. We’d all like to hear more about your own views about this and

106Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. 107DeDreu, C.K.W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003b). A contingency theory of task conflict and performance in groups and organizational teams. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons LTD.

104Lublin, J.S. (2014, February 14). The high cost of avoiding conflict at work. The Wall Street Journal. wsj.com 105Behfar, K., Peterson, R. S., Mannix, E. A., & Trochim, W. M. K, “The critical role of conflict resolution in teams,” p. 202.

M08_THOM4204_06_SE_C08.indd 216 10/25/16 3:09 PM