A reader writes: Show I manage a team, and part of their jobs is to provide customer support over the phone. Due to a new product launch, we are expected to provide service outside of our normal hours for a time. This includes some of my team coming in on a day our office is normally closed (based on lowest seniority because no one volunteered). One employee asked to come in two hours after the start time due to her college graduation ceremony being that same day (she was taking night classes part-time in order to earn her degree). I was unable to grant her request because she was the employee with the lowest seniority and we need coverage for that day. I said that if she could find someone to replace her for those two hours, she could start later. She asked her coworkers, but no one was willing to come in on their day off. After she asked around, some people who were not scheduled for the overtime did switch shifts with other people (but not her) and volunteered to take on overtime from others who were scheduled, but these people are friends outside of work, and as long as there is coverage I don’t interfere if people want to give or take overtime of their own accord. (Caveat: I did intervene and switch one person’s end time because they had concert tickets that they had already paid for, but this was a special circumstance because there was cost involved.) I told this team member that she could not start two hours late and that she would have to skip the ceremony. An hour later, she handed me her work ID and a list of all the times she had worked late/come in early/worked overtime for each and every one of her coworkers. Then she quit on the spot. I’m a bit upset because she was my best employee by far. Her work was excellent, she never missed a day of work in the six years she worked here, and she was my go-to person for weekends and holidays. Even though she doesn’t work here any longer, I want to reach out and tell her that quitting without notice because she didn’t get her way isn’t exactly professional. I only want to do this because she was an otherwise great employee, and I don’t want her to derail her career by doing this again and thinking it is okay. She was raised in a few dozen different foster homes and has no living family. She was homeless for a bit after she turned 18 and besides us she doesn’t have anyone in her life that has ever had professional employment. This is the only job she has had. Since she’s never had anyone to teach her professional norms, I want to help her so she doesn’t make the same mistake again. What do you think is the best way for me to do this? What?! No, under no circumstances should you do that. If anything, you should consider reaching out to her, apologizing for how you handled the situation, and offering her the job back if she wants it. I’m not usually a fan of people quitting on the spot, but I applaud her for doing it in this case. She was raised in dozens of foster homes, used to be homeless, has no living family, and apparently managed to graduate from college all on her own. That’s amazing. And while I normally think graduation ceremonies are primarily fluff, I’m hard-pressed to think of anyone who deserves to be able to attend her own graduation ceremony as much as this woman does. You should have been bending over backwards to ensure she could attend. Rigidly adhering to rules generally isn’t good management. Good management requires nuance and judgment. Sometimes it requires making exceptions for good employees so that you don’t lose them. Sometimes it requires assessing not just what the rules say but what the right and smart thing to do would be. One of the frustrating things about your letter is that despite rigidly adhering to the rules with this person, you were willing to make an exception for someone else (the person with the concert tickets). I’m at a loss to understand how concert tickets are an obvious exception-maker but this person’s situation wasn’t. And you note that she was your “best employee by far”! She never missed a day of work in six years, she was your go-to person, she covered for every other person there, and she was all-around excellent … and yet when she needed you to help her out with something that was important to her, you refused. There’s a lesson to be learned here, but it’s not for her. Read an update to this letter here.
Common and ineffective strategies to deal with workplace disputes include:
Principles to Help:
Source: CDR Associates,Conflict Resolution for Managers and Leaders, John Wiley & Sons, 2007 and Craig Runde and Tim Flanagan,Becoming a Conflict Competent Leader, John Wiley & Sons, 2007. Understanding Conflict Handling StylesIn a dispute, it's often easier to describe how others respond then to evaluate how we respond. Each of us has a predominant conflict style. We can gain a better understanding of the impact that our personal conflict style has on other people. With a better understanding, you can make a conscious choice on how to respond to others in a conflict situation. Behavioral scientists Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann, who developed the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, have identified five styles—competition, collaboration, compromise, avoidance, and accommodation. No conflict style is inherently right or wrong, but one or more styles could be inappropriate or ineffective for a given situation. 1. CompetingValue of own issue/goal: High Competitors come across as aggressive, autocratic, confrontational, and intimidating. A competitive style is an attempt to gain power and pressure a change. A competitive style can be appropriate when you have to implement an unpopular decision, make a quick decision, the decision is vital in a crisis, or it is important to let others know how important an issue is to you – "standing up for your right." However, relationships are harmed beyond repair and may encourage other parties to use covert methods to get their needs met. 2. AccommodatingValue of own issue/goal: Low Accommodators set aside their own needs because they want to please others in order to keep the peace. Smoothing or harmonizing can result in a false solution to a problem and can create feelings in a person that range from anger to pleasure. Accommodators are unassertive and cooperative and may play the role of a martyr, complainer, or saboteur. However, accommodation can be useful when one is wrong or when you want to minimize losses to preserve relationships. It can become competitive – "I am nicer than you are" – and may result in reduced creativity and increased power imbalances. 3. AvoidingValue of own issue/goal: Low Avoiders deliberately ignore or withdraw from a conflict rather than face it. Avoiders do not seem to care about their issue or the issues of others. People who avoid the situation hope the problem will go away, resolve itself without their involvement, or rely on others to take the responsibility. Avoidance can be appropriate when you need more time to think and process, time constraints demand a delay, or the risk of confrontation is not worth what might be gained. However, avoidance is destructive if the other person perceives that you don’t care enough to engage. By not dealing with the conflict, this style allows the conflict to simmer potentially resulting in angry or negative outbursts. 4. CompromisingValue of own issue/goal: Medium Compromisors are willing to sacrifice some of their goals and persuade others to give up theirs too–give a little, get a little. Compromisors maintain the relationship and can take less time than other methods, but resolutions focus on demands rather than needs or goals. The compromise is not intended to make all parties happy or find a decision that makes the most business sense, but rather ensures something just and equitable even if it causes a loss for both parties. Power is defined by what one part can coerce or get the other to give up. To split the difference game playing can result and the outcome is less creative and ideal. 5. CollaboratingValue of own issue/goal: High Collaboration generates creative solutions that satisfy all the parties’ concerns and needs. Collaborators identify the underlying concerns, test assumptions, and understand the views of others. Collaboration takes time and if the relationship among the parties is not important, then it may not be worth the time and energy to create a win-win solution. However, collaboration fosters respect, trust, and builds relationships. Collaborators address the conflict directly and in a way that expresses willingness for all parties to get what they need. In any conflict ask: "Is my preferred conflict handling style the very best I can use to resolve this conflict or solve this problem?" Source: Thomas, K. W. and R.H. Kilmann, Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument Focus on Interests (Needs), Not Positions (Wants)Understanding people's interests is not a simple task, because we tend to communicate our positions – things that are likely to be concrete and explicit. Try to recognize the difference between positions and interests to assist in creative problem solving.
Remember that figuring out your interests is just as important as figuring out their interests. How to Identify InterestsTo identify interests of the other person, you need to ask questions to determine what the person believes he or she truly needs. When you ask, be sure to clarify that you are not asking questions for justification of their position, but for a better understanding of their needs, fears, hopes, and desires. Using open-ended questions that encourage a person to "tell their story" helps you begin to understand their interest. Open ended questions are opposite of closed-ended questions, which require a response of "yes" or "no." To illustrate the difference, consider the following example:
Examples of open-ended questions:
It is not uncommon for you or the other person to have multiple interests. Problem solving based on interests leads to more creative and successful resolutions. Source: Fisher, Ury, and Patton. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Houghton Mifflin, Second Edition, 1992. Listening EffectivelyProblem solving requires effective listening skills. When you listen effectively, you help calm the other person’s emotions so they feel heard. Once emotions are deescalated then both parties can use cognitive problem-solving to generate options. Pay attention to your listening behaviors. Be cautious of:
Check out this Ted Talk on 10 ways to improve conversations We filter information through our biases, values, emotions, meaning of words, and physical frame of mind. Be cautious of:
How to Listen Effectively
Conflict Management Bibliography
|