Constructive Conflict 1: Intro to Anger
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•30 views
Part 1 of 3 in a crash course on conflict resolution in organizations of distributed authority & small semi-autonomous creative teams
Recommended
More Related Content
More from Holly Mae Haddock
More from Holly Mae Haddock (10)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (17)
Constructive Conflict 1: Intro to Anger
- 1. constructive conflict 1: introduction to anger
- 3. tuckman’s
- 10. what are you protecting?
- 11. schemas
- 12. types of conflict: goals
- 13. resources
- 14. personalities
- 15. styles
- 16. core values
- 17. *share: what type of conflict did you have?* a. goals b. resources c. personalities d. styles e. core values
- 19. competing
- 20. avoiding
- 21. compromising
- 22. accommodating
- 23. collaborating
- 24. *share: what style did you use to try to resolve your conflict?* a. competing b. avoiding c. compromising d. accommodating e. collaborating
Editor's Notes
- Warm up – What’s said is here stays here Anything you’d like to keep out of the group Something you’d like to have inside the group (quick temenos – make 3 stickies)
- These build on each other http://slooowdown.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/a-summary-of-the-five-dysfunctions-of-a-team-by-patrick-lencioni/
- tuckmans
- -what is differentiation? -fusion vs individuation -the step after commitment -a separate identity committed to the whole -enormously important psychologically for health and balance -differentiation of roles, skills, points of view, strengths & weaknesses, values
- Danger and an opportunity Ask the group: what’s the danger What’s the opportunity -main energy that creates differentiation is conflict -if you don’t have conflict, you may have false harmony – there is no getting out of the conflict stage & it is important to experience it consciously -if you have no conflict, you may have no trust in your team What’s the danger of NOT dealing with conflict?
- What was the situation (in one sentence) What do you remember thinking about the situation What do you remember doing/saying (actions observable to a 3rd party) What emotions do you remember feeling What body sensations do you remember noticing Use the Cross-sectional formulation: Responses to conflict vary a little bit, but the feelings are universal Part of the human response to conflict Universal experiences This as a reminder that during conflict, people have all these things going on (as do you) Fight or flight tapping into your lizard brain (pre-emotion)
- Adrenalin: knots in your stomach Body heats up clenching hands or jaw Stomach butterflies or tension feeling clammy or flushed Tight chest breathing faster Shallow breathing headaches Racing thoughts pacing or needing to walk around Sweaty palms seeing “red” Increased heart rate having trouble concentrating pounding heart Mention cool down tensing shoulders
- Reptilian focus: survival Simple processing (it’s old, and also no time for higher level thinking) What goes on in the mind: Black and white thinking (is this a yes or a no), which input does this go into – danger or not danger Rigidity (obsessing on shoulds & musts) Mind reading & jumping to conclusions Collecting straws Blaming
- Ask the question (and go to board) – how does it happen that we respond like this when our actual life is not in danger? Tribal life – possibility of ejection from the clan *discuss: what do work “predators” threaten to “kill”?* Perceived threat -sense of self -sense of security -self-esteem -desired outcome happening -a need can be threatened
- There are other things that you can protect Look at the conflict you brought in, and take a stab at what you think may have been threatened in this scenario: Sense of self-esteem Basic needs Fear of survival Social shame Raise hands: are you 100% sure it was actually threatened? Or did you PERCEIVE it to be threatened, might not have actually been threatened
- How does this happen that people IMAGINE something is threatened when it “actually isn’t”? Draw the anger schema on the board – 2 people meet, and their filters/schemas clash Sensitive insides which can be threatened are perceived or imagined to be threatened
- Conflict is normal and natural, BUT you can also trap people in conflict, or help them through conflict. When conflict happens, it’s good to understand why, & what is at stake, what’s happening. Situations that aggravate and create conflict (allow it to come out). Certain things are breeding grounds for conflict understand the type of conflict you are facing: Conflict of goals is simply that people inside the team want different things -I want to deliver fast -I want to deliver super high-quality -I want to not work overtime -I want to be seen as an expert (more can be found with moving motivators – demo moving motivators in front of the class)
- Conflict over time, attention, whenever there is not enough Examples at Wooga: Jens’ time & attention, engineers, /HR time
- -Usually people who are similar in some way -or very very different -who occupy a similar social role – I’m the funny guy here, if you’re the funny guy, maybe the tribe doesn’t need me anymore -this type of conflict: does well with mediation & self-reflection, coaching the individual -chemistry -”ich kann ihn nicht riechen” – when someone just bothers you for no apparent reason, this seems to be built into life, BUT is not something to be avoided, rather something that creates the alchemical transformation – the right ingredients
- Communication styles cultural Conflict styles Gets better with practice & mediation Straight shooter vs. diplomat MBTI types If the willingness to get along is there – this is solvable Non-violent communication – Constructive communication: “I hear that you [X]. AND I need/want/experience [Y]. AND maybe WE can Z Reference: template for clean communication
- This is a little different than goals, but related in some way – this when we are talking about an unalterable set of core beliefs, The bad news is that these are the hardest to work around. still, some solutions may be gathered in an additive approach – You X, and I Y, and We Z
- Did you guys fill out the questionnaire – did anything surprise you, etc Each style has pros & cons & are appropriate for certain settings People usually tend towards one or the other You can test your own (& have your team test theirs) You can choose a style appropriate for the situation you are in graphic source: https://www.cpp.com/products/tki/index.aspx
- Reference: http://web.mit.edu/collaboration/mainsite/modules/module1/1.11.5.html HOW When you: stress your position without considering opposing pts of view Highly assertive, minimal cooperation Goal is TO WIN GOOD FOR -good for quick action, unpopular decisions, doing the right thing (what needs to be done but no one has the courage to do) CONS: Overuse of this style: lack of feedback, reduced learning, low empowerment -surrounds you with Yes Men -can be eyerolling, inflammatory statements, gestures that undermine people, angry, violent temper UNDERUSE: lowered levels of influence, slow to action, indecisiveness, withheld contributions – can result in threatening separation as a way of making people give in, launching personal attacks
- What it’s like: You don’t satisfy your concerns or those of the other -low assertiveness, AND low cooperativeness -GOAL: to delay GOOD FOR: -issues of low importance -to reduce tension -to buy time -when you are in a lower position/have no control -problem is a symptom of a much larger issue & you need to deal with the core issue first -good for diplomacy, developing a sense of timing, skill of sidestepping loaded questions OVERUSE: Low level of input, decision by default, -allow issues to fester -breakdown in communication -can’t speak frankly without fear of repercussion -being untruthful when asked if something is wrong -sullen -passive aggressive by being late or not paying attention at meetings UNDERUSE: Too many issues taken at once Hostility in the work place Inability to prio, delegate a problem for size & importance
- What it’s like: part assertive, part cooperative GOAL: to find middle ground GOOD FOR: issues of moderate importance, when both parties equally powerful & committed to opposing views, temporary solutions, or when time is a pressure (you don’t have the time to collaborate) OVERUSE: loss of long-term goals, lack of trust, creates a cynical environment, because no one getting what they want, making concessions to both parties without resolving conflict. UNDERUSE: power struggles, ineffective negotiating, or wasting time looking for a perfect solution when compromise is the only option
- Bend over backwards – you win, me lose WHAT IS IT: forgoing your concerns in order to satisfy the concerns of others Low assertiveness, high cooperativeness GOAL: to yield GOOD FOR: when you want to show that you are reasonable, develop performance, create good will, keep peace, create trust, includes: ability to sacrifice, to be selfless, to obey orders & to yield OVERUSE: ideas don’t get attention, low influence, loss of contribution, and anarchy – victimization, not taking up enough space (depression, self-betrayal, psychological costs) UNDERUSE: lack of rapport, low morale, saying yes and then holding a grudge
- WHAT: highly assertive AND highly cooperative GOAL: Win/win solution GOOD FOR: integrating solutions, learning, merging perspectives, gaining commitment, improving relationships. Open discussion of issues, task proficiency, equal distributing work amongst team, better brainstorming, development of creative problem solving. Very appropriate for a team environment OVERUSE: too much time on trivial matters, diffusion of responsibility, being taken advantage of UNDERUSE: quick fix solutions, lack of commitment by other team members, disempowerment, & loss of innovation
- Next time, we will talk about: How to deal with anger in yourself, others, and your team