Team Conflict Resolution

Importance of conflict resolution strategies

Successful teams (and families) are the amalgamation of many different individuals into a cohesive unit. With this variety of personalities it is critical that team leaders understand how to effectively manage conflicts. While some may argue the best solution is prevention, others believe conflict is inevitable and can be healthy for a team. Regardless of philosophy successful teams will, at some point, be confronted with conflict within the group. “Conflicts are part of individual relationships and organizational development, and no relationship or organization can hope to mature to productivity and be successful without being able to resolve conflicts effectively” (Cottringer, 1997).

Facilitating conflict resolution is a skill all team leaders should understand. Various processes exist to manage these events and all forms the facilitator and team members must agree on the means for resolution. “In order for a team to be successful, it is essential that members know the basics of conflict resolution, delegation, and consensus building” (Convey, 1994). When the team members are unclear on the process or unable to implement an agreed upon resolution process, additional conflicts can arise from the mediation. One of the first steps, when brining a team together, is defining the team charter. It is within this charter that the process for conflict resolution should be noted. Additionally team members should be educated in the basics of the mediation process. With this foundational knowledge the team can effectively work through conflicts as they arise.

Sources of conflict

The sources of conflict can be as varied as the individuals within the team. These sources can range from working style to personalities conflicts. Understanding the various sources of conflict enables the leader to work through the resolution process more effectively. For example, in a large organization nearby, a project team was experiencing a series of conflicts. Analysis of the sources indicated misunderstandings on what the problems were that the team was actually facing. A few individuals stated the team produced poor quality work while others stated the work was not being completed on time. As this team discussed the conflict a second source became evident. The organization and team had conflicting understanding of the goals the team was striving toward. Significant pressure was being placed on quantity while the core team was attempting to work on the quality of the solution. Even where the overall goals were agreed upon, there were additional conflicts regarding the on the strategies and tactics to achieve those goals. What we see on the surface of a conflict is only the tip of the iceberg (McDaniel & Carstarphen, Solving Conflicts – Building Trust!, 2004). Leaders and team members need to dig in and understand the true sources of the conflict in order to devise the appropriate solution. Approaching a conflict with partial information may result in a solution that address only part of the problem or maybe none at all.

The Conflict-Concerns-Goals-Actions (CCGA) Process

Various processes exist that enable the team to gain the required understanding of the conflict. Most successful processes follow a standard flow of conflict identification, understanding the various concerns, clarifying the goals, and identifying possible actions (McDaniel, Conflict to Cooperation, 2005). This flow is called the CCGA process, for Conflict, Concerns, Goals, Actions. “The value of the CCGA process is that it “short circuits” our tendency to simply jump from our personal understanding of the conflict directly into a solution before considering other worthy factors.” (McDaniel & Carstarphen, 2004).

The first stage of this process is agreeing on what the conflict is. This process accomplishes two key elements, first it calls out the fact that there is a conflict within the team and it clarifies what the conflict is. With the team members in agreement on the issue, the group can move on to the second phase, Concerns. In this second stage the facilitator work to uncover the issues and motivations that are driving the conflict from each party. This process requires the team have a level of trust to begin with. In the concerns phase the team members begin to use that trust when discussing their concerns. As the concerns are raised a variety of emotions can flood the discussion. The facilitator and team need to be able to trust each other enough and communicate effectively to work through this process. Once the individual’s concerns are understood, the group can move to clarifying the goals. In the third stage the team answers the question “what are we trying to accomplish”. Clarifying the objectives sets a flag for the team to use as a guide when determining a course of action. With the goals understood the team is now free to move on to discuss possible actions for resolving the conflict. While named CCGA, there is an additional “C” which truly enables the whole process. This process relies heavily on communication. The success of this process comes from the communication abilities of those involved. Being able to trust and communicate through the discussion without attacking or withdrawing is critical to successful resolution. These qualities need to be exhibited by both the facilitator, and team members.

Conclusion

“As a team leader, one must realize the paradox that surrounds conflict. The team needs to embrace conflict as a means of generating and evaluating ideas. While at the same time, it must shy away from it to prevent anger, frustration, or alienation. The biggest challenge for the team leader is figuring out how to balance these two forces” (Brockmann, 1996) Utilizing a standard process for conflict resolution provides the team with a basis for trust in discussing issues. Working through this process enables the team to understand all the elements creating the friction as well. The CCGA process also helps the team work through solutions that address not only the conflict itself but the underlying concerns the team members have. Working with the human side of teams can be difficult, but it can also be rewarding. Following an agreed upon process such as the CCGA enable teams to work through issues ranging from lunch plans to even the most emotionally charge conflicts, through a defined communication process.

References

Brockmann, E. (1996). Removing the paradox of conflict from group decisions. Academy of Management Executive , Vol 10 (Issue 2), p 61-62.

Convey, S. (1994). Performance measurement in cross-functional teams. CMA Magazine , Vol 68(Issue 8), p 13-15.

Cottringer, W. (1997). Conflict Management. Executive Excellence Magazine , Vol 14 (Issue 8), p 6.

McDaniel, G. (2005). Conflict to Cooperation. Austin: 1st World Library.

McDaniel, G., & Carstarphen, M. (2004, Apr). Solving Conflicts – Building Trust! Retrieved Jan 30, 2009, from Texasnonprofits: http://www.txnp.org/articles/articles.asp?ArticleID=1482

Townsley, C. A. (2008). Resolving Conflict in Work Teams. Retrieved January 30, 2009, from Team Building Directory: http://www.innovativeteambuilding.co.uk/pages/articles/conflicts.htm

Stages of Team Development

Most materials discuss the four primary distinct phases of team development. These phases include forming, storming, norming and performing (McDonald, 2005). Looking further into the stages it becomes clear that teams progress through these four stages possibly multiple times (Holpp, 1999), before entering a fifth stage which is referred to as adjourning (Scott, 2005).  Analyzing the progress of an actual team  it is clear the team progresses through all of these stages through the course of it’s existence.

The Team

Limited Brands is a large organization with many teams. Over the course of seven years, the Limited Brands‘s Victoria’s Secret eCommerce development team progressed through many iterations of the stages of team development. The team formed in the late 1990’s as a small group of individuals focused on developing a website for the predominantly catalog based organization. This loose team had no strict governance or guidance. In the early 2000’s the site had been established as a leader in internet commerce. The team was in the spotlight within the organization as the business shifted toward digital commerce. New members were added, new skills were learned and the team grew and reformed. Around 2005 the organization began to restructure, separating the traditional clothing side of Limited Brands from the Intimates and Fragrances. Leadership saw a new vision for the ecommerce division. This new vision positioned the Intimates division as a center for not only multi-brand commerce but also as a service for other companies looking to sell online. At this point leadership sought out high end vendors to create a new site architecture and ecommerce platform that would supplant the existing one. The plans for the new site were not widely known. Within the original team however word got around as team members began to consult on the new platform. Slowly members of the original team were moved to the new platform or left the company. The result was a skeleton crew left maintaining the original site.

The stages

This team represents a typical case, common in many organizations where teams are built for a project then dismantled once the project has been completed. The journey these teams progress through is also similar across organizations. Understand the stages and the needs of each stage enables leaders to position their teams for success.

Forming

In the forming stage the team is founded and members tend to share an optimistic view (McDonald, 2005). There is seldom conflict as the group looks to see who fits where. Leaders can facilitate progress through this stage by clarifying the objective of the team, soliciting strengths and weaknesses, identifying roles and defining conflict resolution systems (McDonald, 2005).

The development team at Victoria’s Secret progressed through this phase similar to most organizations. The group came together with a clear focus, create an ecommerce website. The team also waited for roles and responsibilities to be resolved. Over time team member skills began to surface and the team began to organize.

Storming

The storming phase is often one of the most critical phases for a team. It is at this stage that the team begins to understand the true scope of the tasks at hand as well as the nature of the various team members. While this phase is typically credited as one that exhibits personality clashes, and team conflict (McDonald, 2005), more commonly these elements are not readily visible. Frequently the storming phase is hidden in civility and expressed through sarcasm and innuendo (Scott, 2005). Professionals are trained to be polite and civil to each other. It is important to note however that if the team progresses through this phase without resolving differences there may be long lasting liabilities for the team and project (Scott, 2005). This is the phase where the team really learns how to work together. The storming phase results from team members trusting each other enough to say what they honestly feel regardless of the risks (Patnode, 2003). The storming process improves ideas, challenges assumptions and obstacles (Patnode, 2003). While this phase is typically the most uncomfortable it is also the most important and should be encouraged rather than quickly passed over.

The development team experienced many episodes of storming over the project lifecycle. After the initial forming stages as well as after new members joined the team, eventually personalities would reset and voices would be heard. These conflicts were productive and ranged from meeting attendance to application design principles. This team understood the storming phase well.

Norming

Finally in the norming stage, the team begins to work together. Fighting and bickering reduces (Scott, 2005) while communication becomes open and honest (McDonald, 2005). At this point leaders should focus on progress and encouragement. Managers should celebrate progress but continue to foster communication (McDonald, 2005).

Looking at the Victoria’s Secret development team there is evidence of multiple norming stages coupled to each storming phase. Through this phase management did in fact continue to encourage communication and worked to improve the team even more.

Performing

Here in the performing stage, clear stable structures appear and the team is able to work toward a shared goal (Scott, 2005). At this point the team works with a high degree of mutual support and respect (McDonald, 2005). Leaders at this stage may feel a sense of relief and may be tempted to relax, however there are still activities that will promote continued success in the team. Leaders should work to celebrate the teams successes, recognize the achievements an continue to challenge the team (McDonald, 2005). In most long lasting projects and teams, the progress through these phases tends to be more cyclical where teams slip back into previous stages (Holpp, 1999), managers should be mindful in this stage to watch for team regression to a previous stage (McDonald, 2005).

The development at Victoria’s Secret was no different than those in other organizations. The performing stage was clearly recognizable as the team gelled and produced many successes. Leadership was always ready with praise and additional challenges.

Adjourning

Often neglected in texts is the adjourning stage. The adjourning stage is when the team disbands and the project is ended (Scott, 2005). Many projects end and teams disband with little to no intervention by management. Team members are sent to other teams where their accomplishments and hard work may not be recognized. Management needs to take time and care to integrate these displaced members into the organization. These stars can fade if not transplanted with care.

Thus was the case in Limited Brands. The organization had placed the majority of the attention on the new project yet left the existing team with no means. Team members were left to find their own way to new teams in the organization, while others simply left the company. The adjourning stage of the process can be the most risky. Organizations spend lots of time and money training and building individuals talent and knowledge into business critical assets. Poor execution in the adjourning phase can have significant effects on these investments.

Conclusion

While teams and organizations all will differ, there are core aspects that are universal. These phases of team development are critical to the success of all teams. Individuals in leadership or on the front lines can impact a team’s development and performance by taking these stages into account. Planning for and encouraging the various stages of team development will lead to high performing teams and organizations.

References

Holpp, L. (1999). Managing Teams. New York: McGraw-Hill.

McDonald, T. (2005, Nov). Building an Effective Team. Health Care Registration: The Newsletter for Health Care Registration Professionals , Vol. 15 (Issue 2), pp. p3-4.

Patnode, N. H. (2003, Mar/Apr). Can’t Get To Performing Without Storming. Program Manager , Vol. 32 (Issue 2), p. p42.

Scott, J. T. (2005). Chapter 10: Managing Teams and Work Groups. Concise Handbook of Management: A Practitioner’s Approach , p79-84.

Bite Size: Code Review with Jupiter Plugin

Jupiter is an eclipse plug-in designed specifically to coordinate code reviews across teams. The plug-in provides a basic procedure for managing the code review process. I’ve posted a document on Scribd that describes how to use this great tool to manage your code review processes.

View Code Review with Jupiter on Scribd

Bite Size: Fortifying Your Team

The agricultural industry has know for centuries that the earth can only give so many nutrients to a crop before it is exhausted. Letting the fields lay fallow for a season allows the soil to regain some of its value. Unfortunately in this system the field is left unused for a season providing no direct value to the farmer. Crop rotation on the other hand provides similar benefits by utilizing for different crops that consume different nutrients. In this manner the soil is allowed to replenish certain nutrients while continuing to provide direct value with a different crop.

Businesses can benefit from this same methodology, while it is well known that appropriate hours and vacation time are critical to an employee’s sustainability  simply letting the employee lay fallow may not provide as much benefit as adding skill rotation into the plan. In addition to vacation time managers should seek to fortify their team by rotating skills throughout the team on a regular basis. Here in the IT world that may mean things a simple as passing around on-call support. Steven Covey speaks about sharpening the saw, with this in mind a more fulfilling technique would be to rotate R&D responsibilities in the team which would enhance both the skills of the individual and opportunities of the organization.

Rotate your crops and fortify your teams.