Resolving conflict is extremely difficult and sometimes, due to circumstances beyond your control, doomed to failure even before you start. Sometimes you may be forced to implement “the last resort” which is to relocate one or more employees so that they no longer work together. Here are some tips that you should try before taking desperation measures.

Most problems I’ve experienced while attempting to mediate conflict fall under one of two headings. The first is that many managers who attempt to mediate such situations fall prey to common myths about the conflict resolution process. The second is related directly to the conflict resolution process itself; it is far more complex than most managers believe.  To help with each of these issues, I’ll briefly describe the most common myths, and then outline a process that works well most of the time.

Five Common Myths:

• All conflict is resolvable:  It’s important to approach conflict situations as a “realistic optimist”.  The optimist must believe that something can be done to rebuild relationships.  The realist knows that as a third party, you can do play an outstanding role as a skilled third party, but success depends on the antagonists; their attitudes and emotions over which you have no control.  Not all conflicts are resolvable.  If, for example, two individuals have been in extreme conflict for many years, it is very unlikely that the conflict can be resolved amicably. This is just one of the many factors that may make conflict irresolvable.
• The antagonists want to resolve the conflict: We all know how stressful and unpleasant conflict can be. We all know the benefits of win/win outcomes. Having said that, one of the biggest barriers to conflict resolution is that one or both parties don’t want a fair resolution; they want to punish the other party.  This becomes more challenging when both parties tell you that they genuinely forgive past grievances and really want to patch things up, when in reality or even subliminally they don’t. You, the mediator, have no way of knowing.
• All conflict is bad:  If an employee thinks something is wrong, or something should be improved, then you would hope that he or she will say so. However it’s this “saying so" and the repercussions that are at the root of most conflict. Having differing opinions, voicing discontent, and coming up with ideas to change the status quo, are all positive aspects of conflict. It’s when the parties don’t have the skills or desire to resolve differences constructively that it becomes dysfunctional conflict.
• Conflict is all about people:  It’s true that if you didn’t have people you wouldn’t have conflict. However, most conflicts in organizations don’t start out as interpersonal issues; they are rooted in an organizational issue. Conflicts erupt because roles are ambiguous (who’s responsible for tidying and restocking the coffee station?) or because the work of one individual is dependant on the work of another.  When resolving conflict in organizations you must identify and rectify the organizational source before dealing with the interpersonal issues.

• The best way to resolve conflict is to get the protagonists in a room and “hash it out!”  At some point in the resolution process it will be advisable to bring both parties together to agree on important points. But seldom is this the first thing you  do. And this myth, acts to segue into part two which describes a recommended process for conflict resolution.

A Process That Works:

• Just the facts, ma’am: The first step in the resolution process is to gather information. Talk to people. Talk to the antagonists; talk to their boss, talk to colleagues. Always remember that, whoever you’re speaking to, you aren’t getting an accurate picture of reality. You’re getting someone’s perception of things that happened, and their recollection of reality, coloured by personal biases.  The best you can hope to do is piece together a collection of perceptions gathered from all available sources.
• The Root of the Matter:  As we’ve said, there is nearly always an organizational issue that triggers and fuels the conflict. It can be as mundane as refilling the empty coffee maker, or something as complex as ambiguous job descriptions and overlapping responsibilities. Whatever it is, it will continue to generate conflict if it isn’t resolved. Find it and fix it!
• Repair the Damage Done: This step is more difficult than it may seem. It’s tempting to say “let bygones be bygones” but often, especially if the conflict has been going on for awhile, individuals have a hard time “letting go.”  They want to punish the other person for past hurts, real or imagined. What makes it so complicated is that usually the parties will tell you that they are willing to forgive and forget, and perhaps even mean it. But the emotional debris gets in the way, and they are back at each others’ throats. Forgiveness is often a lot more difficult than we realize.  But if there isn’t a genuine attempt by both parties, the resolution will be short lived.
• I Will If You Will:  Once you’re confident that the organizational trigger is no longer an issue, and that the parties have, more or less, agreed to let go of past grievances, then you can turn their attention to the future. This is best done one on one, before bringing the parties together, and it entails getting commitments from each party regarding future behaviour. They must each agree to change specific behaviours in order to rebuild the damaged relationship. When you have enough common ground, then you can bring them together to fine tune the agreements.
• Early Warning System: Regardless of the sincerity of the agreements, there will very likely be lapses on the part of one or both of the antagonists.  When this happens, if you’ve agreed on an early warning process, then you can get back onto a positive track as quickly as possible. The simplest system is to ensure that both agree to approach the other and tell him or her very tactfully that they have done something that he or she agreed not to do.  Another process that can be very useful is to include the antagonists in a small cooperative problem solving team. This process should be facilitated by an individual who can provide objective feedback to each party and also provide tips on win/win discussion styles.
• Monitor and Fine-Tune:  No process is perfect coming out of the gate. The re-built relationship should be monitored, and each party must feel free to come to you with suggestions, problems or issues.

 As a conclusion, I’ll repeat a point made earlier. Not all conflicts are resolvable. Sometimes, attempting to resolve such situations will make them worse.  If you gather initial information and come to the conclusion that, for whatever reason, the relationship is beyond saving, then it may be best to admit as much, and do whatever you can to separate the parties.

For more information contact Bob Power