Good afternoon and I hope everyone has had an opportunity to grab a bit of lunch today. My name is Shawn Herhusky, and I am a graduate student at the College of Saint Scholastica in the Management program. I’m also the chair of the Financial Development committee for the Mesabi Family YMCA, and in my spare time I work for Securian Dental in retention. I became involved with the Health and Human Services Conference through several of my professor’s who are also presenting here today. When this was described to me, I thought I could contribute something of value.To prepare for this presentation, I used various social media sites to speak with professional in the Health and Human Services community. I explain my background and that I wanted to contribute something to this conference that people in their profession would find valuable. The first and foremost issue they wanted to address was the recession. While I don’t have the necessary time or expertise to go too deep into current economics, I will touch on it briefly first. We’ll also indirectly discuss ways of coping with the recession when we touch on how to achieve more with limited resources.They also talked about the stress they were under and how that was effecting themselves and their coworkers. I decided that my presentation would revolve around providing tactics for dealing with both the lack of resources, and the internal conflicts. I’ll do this by discussing sources of conflict in the workplace, the mythology of teams that eventually lead to unobtainable expectations and techniques for dealing with team dysfunction. We’ll start today with a brief discussion of the recession as it relates to change and conflict.Note on handouts – I did not prepare a handout for this presentation. If, at the end of this presentation, you are interested in receiving a copy of this powerpoint or a list of references used or considered for this presentation please provide your email address on the legal pad behind you. I will send you a copy of the presentation and resources in a way that will not disclose your email to anyone else, and destroy the list in a way that protects your privacy.
You’ll hear me refer to the recession as a change driver.When you think about a change driver, think big. The internet was a change driver for communications, for example.
Victim of Success– if you managed to meet your operational objections, you will be expected to meet it from this point on with the same resources.
Transition - This is very brief and incomplete list, and I know if we took more time we could build on this simple idea. But it serves as a good segway into our next topic, sources of conflict. While the recession could be seen as the engine that’s making things worse, we need to be able to describe what exactly is happening at this team level. So, we’re going to touch on sources on conflict, stages or degrees of conflict, and end this section with how we react to a conflict. Let’s start with Sources of Conflict.
In order to effectively deal with conflict, we need to be able to identify it before we can come up with a prescription for change. A mediator, Christopher Moore, developed a conflict wheel to describe different forms of conflict. His style of mediation is less prescriptive which as an OD student appeals to me. He’s also known for using the show Leave it to beaver as role-playing and teaching aid. You can read more on Christopher Moore at the website mediator.com.
Data Conflicts are caused by lack of information, misinformation, different views on what is relevant, different interpretations of data, different assessment procedures. Stems from a misunderstanding of what is valuable.
Interest Conflicts are caused by perceived or actual competition. substantive (content) interests – a tangible thing or item. In a conflict on who can use the car on Friday night, the car is a substantive interestprocedural interests - how decisions are madepsychological interests - feelings about each other that affect on the conflict
Structural Conflicts are caused by a destructive pattern of behavior or interaction (warpath), unequal control ownership or distribution of resources, unequal power and authority, geographic, physical, or environmental factors that hinder cooperation (remote), time constraints
Value Conflicts are caused by different criteria for evaluating ideas or behavior, exclusive intrinsically valuable goals, different ways of life, ideology, and religionDifferent criteria - bias
Relationship Conflicts are caused by strong emotions, misperceptions or stereotypes, poor communication or miscommunication, repetitive negative behaviorTransiton: We’ve discussed a way to organize conflict, so we can address it. But we also need to look at the severity of the conflict. For that, we will use a very simple three part model.
A stage one conflict is ongoing and generally requires little action. Most people are coping unconsciously, but coping strategies, like tolerance, are more effective when conscious. Conflict is characterized by day to day irritations that can become a problem. Differences exist in individual goals, needs, coping and values. Anger can occur, but it is quick to pass and people are willing and optimistic to work things out.
Stage 2 conflict takes on a quality of competition or “win-lose” attitude. People are tied to the problems and self interest and appearance become important. The CYA attitude predominates. People keep track of verbal victories, record mistakes, witness who takes sides, and rehearse imaginary debates. Alliances and clicks form, and in volunteer agencies people usually leave. People talk in generalizations, use exaggerated words, and withhold information due to lack of trust. The earlier “wait and see” attitude is replaced by a confrontive “you prove it to me”.
Stage 3 objectives shift from wanting to win to wanting to hurt and get rid of the other party. Being right and wrong become consuming motivations. Insiders and outsiders are identified by the competing parties as people are forced to take sides. Small factions and leaders evolve, and group cohesion is more important than organization unity. Merits of an argument and strength with which positions are held are greatly exaggerated at this point. If consensus cannot be reached, arbitration may be necessary. Interveners must be perceived as totally impartial if they are to be effective. The losers may leave, carry a grudge, or require replacement unless the loss can be minimized.Transition: We’ve discussed the types of conflicts and their severity, but now we need to address how we as members of the team react to what’s happening.
In 1974, Kenneth W.Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmann introduced their Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (Tuxedo NY: Xicom, 1974). The TKI, as it is also known, popularized conflict style inventories and, according to the publisher's website, there are over five million copies published, making it the best known of the commercial conflict style inventories. We won’t be covering the TKI per se, but rather the conflict modes represented in the academic model. The TKI is copyright Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmann.
Competitive: People who tend towards a competitive style take a firm stand, and know what they want. They usually operate from a position of power, drawn from things like position, rank, expertise, or persuasive ability. This style can be useful when there is an emergency and a decision needs to be make fast; when the decision is unpopular; or when defending against someone who is trying to exploit the situation selfishly. However it can leave people feeling bruised, unsatisfied and resentful when used in less urgent situations.
Collaborative: People tending towards a collaborative style try to meet the needs of all people involved. These people can be highly assertive but unlike the competitor, they cooperate effectively and acknowledge that everyone is important. This style is useful when you need to bring together a variety of viewpoints to get the best solution; when there have been previous conflicts in the group; or when the situation is too important for a simple trade-off.
Compromising: People who prefer a compromising style try to find a solution that will at least partially satisfy everyone. Everyone is expected to give up something and the compromiser him- or she also expects to relinquish something. Compromise is useful when the cost of conflict is higher than the cost of losing ground, when equal strength opponents are at a standstill and when there is a deadline looming.
Accommodating: This style indicates a willingness to meet the needs of others at the expense of the person’s own needs. The accommodator often knows when to give in to others, but can be persuaded to surrender a position even when it is not warranted. This person is not assertive but is highly cooperative. Accommodation is appropriate when the issues matter more to the other party, when peace is more valuable than winning, or when you want to be in a position to collect on this “favor” you gave. However people may not return favors, and overall this approach is unlikely to give the best outcomes.
Avoiding: People tending towards this style seek to evade the conflict entirely. This style is typified by delegating controversial decisions, accepting default decisions, and not wanting to hurt anyone’s feelings. It can be appropriate when victory is impossible, when the controversy is trivial, or when someone else is in a better position to solve the problem. However in many situations this is a weak and ineffective approach to take.Transition : So, we’ve said a lot on conflict, and this might have convinced you that all conflict is bad. But, there are benefits to conflict.
Why conflict is good - Diversity prevents groupthink – “A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action”. - Irving JanisAllows for greater creativity, diversity of ideasBetter understanding of your clients needs through a more diverse workgroup (blind spots)More potential for innovationWe’ve discussed sources of conflict, degrees of conflict, and how we react. We’ll come back to these ideas when we discuss our options to deal with the stress of the workplace and our “more with less” issues. But one more thing may prevent us from being successful in a team environment, and that’s our ideas on how a team should function.
We’ve discussed the various sources of conflict that can arise when stress is applied to a situation, like the dramatic changes caused by our current economic issues. But there is another set of issues that can cause a group to fail, which is the unrealistic ideas we’ve developed internally about teams. First, let’s start off with a basic description of what is a team. "A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they are mutually accountable." (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993)
Everyone must get alongOnly professionals of equal standings should be on work teamsNo “I” in team (if there are 12 people on the team, there are 12 “I”’s)People like teamsLast kid picked for dodge ball feelingAnxietyDifferences in Response time (maybe use Bob’s example from Cape Cod, the man from India who specifically mentioned that he was more reflective and would not answer immediately)Some people are deferential by nature, may never get to speak unless group is moderatedSome people talk to talk, maybe as a function of their learning styleSchein, HelpingSaving facepower differential deferring to managementhe who talks first more importantTransistion - Now we’ve defined the myths of teams, it’s time to define what we mean by more is less.
Since media began coverage the recession, the phrase “More with less” has become a buzzphrase. If you google it, you’ll find articles from the New York Times, The Economist, and numerous blogs. When we are using the buzzphrase “More with Less”, what we are really talking about it is scarcity. We no longer have the same level of talent and resources, but we as an organization must still perform at an adequate level to demonstrate value to our stakeholders. We have two major issues to address: how to function with the resources we have, and to address the effect this scarcity and the decisions of the companyon our employees.Transition: First, we’ll discuss how to be productive with less resources.
More with Less (adapted from the article Creative Disruption Doing More With Less by Scott Anthony, Forbes Magazine, excerpted from the book The Silver Lining: An innovation playbook for uncertain times, Harvard Business Press)Step one - Segment your market by the jobs the customers are trying to get done (product usage)Step Two - How does each segment think about performance objectives (metrics they use to decide between two different solutions)
Functional objectives, which relate to performance and reliability. Examples of functional objectives include "removes at least 95% of stains," "charges in under an hour," "works every time," "requires no training.“For service, this is the you as your working.
This is how the patient feels about themselves after you assist them.
Companies should then understand:Which of these objectives are most important to the customer, What thresholds have to be crossed to enter into the customer's decision setWhat tradeoffs the customer would tolerate between objectives. In other words, what's absolutely necessary and what would a customer be willing to sacrifice?
The trick is to ensure that you cross the basic performance threshold on every critical dimension, then selectively over-perform in areas that provide the most customer value while thoughtfully decreasing performance along dimensions that don't matter a great deal to a given customer group.Use the examples of children’s cereal. They keep adding things every year to revitalize their brand (chocolate, marshmallows, different nuts, whatever the heck a crunchberry is). If they had to reduce cost, what could they do? Find the items the kids don’t care about, and remove them or put in less. However, psychologically humans become attached very easily. While we might not care about getting something as an additional value, we may care strongly if it’s removed.
On that note, we have no entered the final section of my presentation.
Presumed Innocence- This technique is especially effective when dealing with micro inequities. Promote the idea that we should assume small slights are not intentional and not meant to do harm unless information is presented otherwise (keep things stage 1)
A good example is the rules behind a Bohm campfire. Only one person can speak at a time, no one can address another person directly, anyone can opt in or out at any time, etc.Transition: Now, to discuss how to deal with the sources of conflict we discussed earlier, we will refer back to the Conflict Wheel.
Possible data interventions – reach a consensus of what data is important, agree on the process to collect data, develop common criteria to assess data, use a third party expert to gain outside opinion or break deadlocks
Possible Interest Based Interventions – Focus on interests, not positions, look for objective criteria, develop integrative solutions that address the needs of all parties, search for a way to expand options or resources, develop tradeoffs to satisfy interests of different strengths,
Possible Structural Interventions – Clearly define and change roles, replace destructive behavior patterns, reallocate ownership or control of resources, establish a fair and mutually acceptable decision making process, change negation process from positional to interest based bargaining, modify means of influence used by parties (less coercion, more persuasion), change physical and environmental relationship of parties, modify external pressures on parties, change time constraints
Possible value related intervention – avoid defining problem in terms of value, allow parties to agree and to disagree, create spheres of influence where one set of values dominate, search for super ordinate goal that all parties share
Possible Relationship Interventions – control expression of emotions through procedures, ground rules, caucuses, etc. Promote expression of emotions by legitimizing feelings and providing a process, clarify perceptions and build positive perceptions, improve quality and quantity of communication, block negative repetitive behavior by changing structure, encourage positive problem solving attitudes
Closing That brings us effectively to the close of this presentation. I appreciate your time and attention, and my hope is that you will leave her today with some effective take aways on how to deal with the lack of resources brought on by our current economic climate and also techniques for effectively dealing with the interpersonal issues that this climate may create. I appreciate any feedback, and you can reach me at email@example.com. Thank you again. It’s been a privilege to present here today and to in front of such a great audience.
More With Less
More with Less: Dealing with Team Dysfunction in a Recession Economy Presentation by Shawn Herhusky
Sources of Conflict A Change Driver is a largescale force that producescomplex change in a systemThe fear of uncertaineconomic conditions broughtabout by the recession is onechange driver for a business
Sources of Conflict: The Recession as a Change DriverThe Recession and theeconomic difficulties it createshas a trickle down negativeeffect on the workplace:• limited resources• Unobtainable performance goals• Victim of Success• Fear of additional loss from a future W or double dip recession
Sources of Conflict: The Recession as a Change DriverThis could lead to:• more hostile incidents in the workplace• more vacation or sick time taken• More employees resigning or being termed• possible revenge effects (like a work slowdown)• Workers become more sensitive to micro inequities
Sources of ConflictThe Conflict Wheelas developed by Data ConflictsChristopher Moore Relationship Interest Conflicts Conflicts Value Structural Conflicts Conflicts
Sources of Conflict: The Conflict WheelData Conflicts are caused by: Data• Lack of information Conflicts• Misinformation Relationship Interest• Different views on what Conflicts Conflicts is relevant• Different interpretations of data Value Structural• Different assessment Conflicts Conflicts procedures
Sources of Conflict: The Conflict WheelInterest Conflicts are caused by : Data Conflicts• Perceived or actual competition Relationship Interest Conflicts Conflicts• Substantive (content) interests• Procedural interests• Psychological interests Value Conflicts Structural Conflicts
Sources of Conflict: The Conflict WheelStructural Conflicts are caused by:• A Destructive pattern of Data Conflicts behavior or interaction• Unequal control, ownership, or Relationship Interest distribution of resources Conflicts Conflicts• Unequal power and authority• Geographic, physical, or environmental factors that Value Structural hinder cooperation Conflicts Conflicts• Time constraints
Sources of Conflict: The Conflict WheelValue Conflicts are caused by: Data• Different criteria for Conflicts evaluating ideas or behavior Relationship Conflicts Interest Conflicts• Exclusive intrinsically valuable goals• Different ways of life Value Structural• Ideology Conflicts Conflicts• religion
Sources of Conflict: The Conflict WheelRelationship Conflicts are caused by: Data Conflicts• Strong emotions• Misperceptions or Relationship Interest Conflicts Conflicts stereotypes• Poor communication or miscommunication• Repetitive negative Value Conflicts Structural Conflicts behavior
Sources of Conflict: Stages of ConflictStage One Conflict• Requires little action• Day to day irritations• Anger is quick to pass• People want to work it out Stage One
Sources of Conflict: Stages of ConflictStage 2 Conflict• Competition – Win / Lose• People keep track of victories/ mistakes/ Stage Two who take sides• Alliances• Exaggerations/ generalizations Stage One
Sources of Conflict: Stages of ConflictStage 3 Conflict• Shift from wanting to Stage win to wanting to hurt Three• Neutrals are forced by competing parties to Stage take sides• Factions Two• Losers may leave, carry a grudge, or require Stage One replacement
Sources of Conflict: ResponsesResponses to Conflictbased on the criteria used Competitive Collaborativein The Thomas-KilmannConflict Mode Instrument Compromising Accommodating Avoiding
Sources of Conflict: ResponsesCompetitive:• Take a firm stand and know what they want.• Operate from a position of power Competitive Collaborative drawn from things like : – Position – rank – expertise – persuasive ability Compromising Accommodating• This style can be useful when – there is an emergency and a decision needs to be make fast – when the decision is unpopular – when defending against Avoiding someone who is trying to exploit the situation selfishly
Sources of Conflict: ResponsesCollaborative:• Try to meet the needs of all people involved Competitive Collaborative• Highly assertive but unlike the competitor, they cooperate effectively and acknowledge that everyone is important.• This style is useful when Compromising Accommodating – you need to bring together a variety of viewpoints to get the best solution – when there have been previous conflicts in the group Avoiding – when the situation is too important for a simple trade-off
Sources of Conflict: ResponsesCompromising:• try to find a solution that will at least partially satisfy everyone.• Everyone is expected to give up Competitive Collaborative something and the compromiser him- or she also expects to relinquish something• Compromise is useful when the – cost of conflict is higher than Compromising Accommodating the cost of losing ground – when equal strength opponents are at a standstill – when there is a deadline looming. Avoiding
Sources of Conflict: ResponsesAccommodating:• a willingness to meet the needs of others at the expense of the person’s own needs. Competitive Collaborative• The accommodator often knows when to give in to others, but can be persuaded to surrender a position even when it is not warranted.• This person is not assertive but is highly cooperative. Compromising Accommodating• Accommodation is appropriate when – the issues matter more to the other party – when peace is more valuable than winning Avoiding – when you want to be in a position to collect on this “favor” you gave
Sources of Conflict: ResponsesAvoiding:• seek to evade the conflict entirely Competitive Collaborative• delegates controversial decisions• accepting default decisions• not wanting to hurt Compromising Accommodating anyone’s feelings• It can be appropriate when – victory is impossible – when the controversy is trivial Avoiding – when someone else is in a better position to solve the problem
Sources of Conflict: A Positive View of ConflictWhy Conflict is Good• conflict is natural• Conflict prevents groupthink• Allows for greater creativity of ideas• Better understanding of your clients needs through a more diverse workgroup• More potential for innovation
Mythology of TeamsWhat is a Team?"A team is a small numberof people withcomplementary skills who arecommitted to a commonpurpose, performance goals,and approach for which theyare mutually accountable.“(Katzenbach and Smith, 1993)
Mythology of Teams• Everyone must get along • Some people are deferential by• Only professionals of equal nature, may never get to speak standings should be on work unless group is moderated teams • Some people talk to talk, maybe• No “I” in team (if there are 12 as a function of their learning people on the team, there are 12 style “I”’s) • Saving face• People like teams • Power differential / deferring to – Last kid picked for dodge ball management feeling • He or she who talks first is more – Anxiety important• Differences in Response time
Techniques For Dealing with Team DysfunctionWhen we say “More with Less”, what we mean is scarcity.
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction : ScarcityDetermining Thresholdsand Tolerable Trade offs Functional ObjectivesBy what metric are yourcustomers rating your Social Emotionalservice / performance? Objectives Objectives
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction : ScarcityFunctional objectives,relate to performance and Functionalreliability. Examples of Objectivesfunctional objectives include – "removes at least 95% of stains," – "charges in under an Social Emotional hour," Objectives Objectives – "works every time," – "requires no training."
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction : ScarcityEmotional objectives, whichtypically are things thecustomer feels about Functional Objectivesthemselves. Examples ofemotional objectives include – "treat myself to the best" – "connect me with Social Emotional others" Objectives Objectives – "feel like I got good value"
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction : ScarcitySocial objectives, whichtypically are things thecustomer perceives others Functional Objectivesfeel about them. Examplesof social objectives include, – "impress my peers,“ – "reflect my personal brand,“ Social Emotional – "withstand the Objectives Objectives withering glare of the ‘mom police."
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction : ScarcityCompanies should thenunderstand:• Which of these objectives Functional are most important to the Objectives customer (market segment)• What thresholds have to be crossed to enter into the customers decision set• What tradeoffs the Social Emotional customer would tolerate Objectives Objectives between objectives .
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction : ScarcityThe trick is to ensure that youcross the basic performancethreshold on every criticaldimension • Selectively over-perform in areas that provide the most customer value • decrease performance along dimensions that dont matter a great deal to a given customer group
Techniques For Dealing with Team DysfunctionThe last part of the presentation will focus onteam dysfunction, specifically what we can do to address the effects our current economicsituation or any other high pressure situation has had on the employees.
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalDecide before the conflictoccurs on a mutuallyagreed upon form ofconflict resolution likemediation, arbitration,caucus, etc.Promote the idea of“Presumed Innocence”
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalIf employees have beentermed, address it. Reiterateto employees that thecompany has decided to invest itslimited resources into them.Before proceeding with any formof intervention, create an area ofsafety with set ground rules onbehavior where employees canfeel safe and empowered.
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalReferring back to the Wheel of Conflict to Data Conflicts deal with team dysfunction Relationship Interest Conflicts Conflicts Value Structural Conflicts Conflicts
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalPossible data interventions• Reach a consensus of Data Conflicts what data is important• Agree on the process to Relationship Interest collect data Conflicts Conflicts• Develop common criteria to assess data• Use a third party expert Value Structural to gain outside opinion or Conflicts Conflicts break deadlocks
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalPossible Interest Based Interventions• Focus on interests not Data Conflicts positions• Look for objective criteria• Develop integrative Relationship Conflicts Interest Conflicts solutions that address the needs of all parties• Search for a way to expand options or resources• Develop tradeoffs to satisfy Value Structural interests of different Conflicts Conflicts strengths
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalPossible Structural Interventions –• Clearly define and change roles• Replace destructive behavior Data patterns Conflicts• Reallocate ownership or control of resources• Establish a fair and mutually Relationship Interest acceptable decision making process Conflicts Conflicts• Change negation process from positional to interest based bargaining• Modify means of influence used by parties (less coercion, more persuasion) Value Structural• Change physical and environmental Conflicts Conflicts relationship of parties• Modify external pressures on parties, change time constraints
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalPossible value related intervention Data• Avoid defining problem in Conflicts terms of values• Allow parties to agree Relationship Interest Conflicts Conflicts and to disagree• Create spheres of influence where one set of values dominate Value Structural• Search for super ordinate Conflicts Conflicts goal that all parties share
Techniques For Dealing with Team Dysfunction: InterpersonalPossible Relationship Interventions• Control expression of emotions through procedures, ground Data rules, caucuses, etc. Conflicts• Promote expression of emotions by legitimizing feelings and providing a process Relationship Interest• Clarify perceptions and build Conflicts Conflicts positive perceptions• Improve quality and quantity of communication• Block negative repetitive behavior by changing structure Value Structural• Encourage positive problem Conflicts Conflicts solving attitudes
Closing and Thank youPlease feel free to provide any comments or feedback via email at firstname.lastname@example.org
Fair UseFAIR USE NOTICE: This presentation contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for educational use only. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this presentation is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Image UseAny pictures included in this presentation where taken from royalty free, copy free sources (like Flikr Creative Commons). Many of these sources have specific criteria for reproduction and citation in written works.Please consult the original source of the image before use.