I'm not just talking about client conflict, but any kind of conflict. I know someone who's the queen of conflict; she's always ready for a fight no matter what the circumstances or the consequences, and she doesn't just fight to win, she fights to destroy. I have another acquaintance who politely doesn't rock the boat, but manages "situations" by internalizing everything and working back channels to feed his self interest. I find both to be unhealthy extremes.Personally, I grew up around a number of people who weren't shy about mixing it up. As a kid, I concluded that the more you fought, the more you just didn't get along. So why spend time together? Then I experienced situations where conflict was avoided at all cost; nothing was ever discussed and feelings were bottled up to the point where deep-seated, silent resentment would set like cement. From there, I started to realize that conflict is communication, and it can be healthy, productive communication as long as you have two important dynamics at work:
- It's not personal. You argue about the topic rather than attack one another.
- That the conflict is not about winning or losing, but about reaching the best solution and sharing credit for the result.
Now think about the role conflict plays in your professional life. Can you openly disagree with colleagues to reach solutions that benefit your client? Do you and your client trust each other enough to discuss real or perceived differences in a timely fashion? And when you do, is the relationship helped or hurt?
I'd love to hear your thoughts about conflict - whether you disagree with me or not!
*Image from fatwaitress.com who suggests that Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots may be the answer. Who could argue with that?
At my company, Mullen, we believe in healthy debate and an open and honest engagement in hopes that the best ideas win. Not everyone can play this way, and some clients don't actually want such honesty, though they should. As some have suggested at the conversation I started, it all begins with respect. Not a bad place to start. But from there, have at it.
ReplyDeleteRecent blog:=- Can we all stop agreeing with each other and have some arguments please?
Edward, you said "not everyone can play this way." Since it doesn't come to some people naturally, do you coach them to change, hope they learn by example, or assume that some people will always take things personally regardless of the intent?
ReplyDeleteRecent blog:=- How Do You Manage Conflict?
Leo and Edward -- Among the risks of conflict are a) being seen as negative, b) perceived as "not a team player", c) Not "getting it", and d) being resistant to change.
ReplyDeletePersonality type often governs acceptability of conflict -- even open discussion can be difficult for certain people. But you are right that amid disagreement, presentation of opposing views, even argument, lies the path to enlightenment.
Social media is filled with adherents and evangelists, and people who disagree or are even skeptical are often greeted with a collective scream of outrage. That's partly why (imo) @amandachapel uses such bold (!) language -- the more cautious approach, the less florid prose and the more polite, the less anyone listened.
Further, people in many countries prize politesse in communication style -- whereas many Americans are quite comfortable with asking hard questions, making declarative statements and proclaiming their disagreement, those actions can foul up communication with people with other cultural heritages.
Lastly, Leo wrote: "Since it doesn't come to some people naturally, do you coach them to change, hope they learn by example, or assume that some people will always take things personally regardless of the intent?"
We can hope that indeed WE don't take things personally in these matters -- and recognize the value of discussion without rancor. Rancor is not a necessary part of conflict, or of processing through disagreements. Altogether too often, though, they seem inseparable.
Therefore, the usefulness of conflict isn't a fait acompli -- the relative importance of the topic and outcomes to the individual participants in the discussion can invest everyone too thoroughly in their own objectives to create a better third path.
http://edwardboches.com/can-we-all-stop-agreeing-with-each-other-and-have-some-arguments-please
Leo, your post made me think of two recent topics of discussion.
ReplyDelete1. I recently discussed this concept of those afraid to challenge the ideas of superiors, clients, friends, spouses, etc. Obviously, this can get out of hand and it needs to be directed toward a solution. BUT, I find most people being too kind and quietly disagreeing with decisions. This leads to huge problems down the line in all affairs in business and personal relationships. So, speak up everyone, okay!
2. In my early blog life, I was often afraid to challenge conventional views. Lately, I've found a make a greater impact by offering constructive criticism. In recent examples, I challenged the value of the concept of social media and the value in the modern world of in-person professional organizations. I've been inspired to keep to this path.
Great post, Leo. Thanks.
@morate
tmosgarage.blogspot.com
Leo, your post made me think of two recent topics of discussion.
ReplyDelete1. I recently discussed this concept of those afraid to challenge the ideas of superiors, clients, friends, spouses, etc. Obviously, this can get out of hand and it needs to be directed toward a solution. BUT, I find most people being too kind and quietly disagreeing with decisions. This leads to huge problems down the line in all affairs in business and personal relationships. So, speak up everyone, okay!
2. In my early blog life, I was often afraid to challenge conventional views. Lately, I've found a make a greater impact by offering constructive criticism. In recent examples, I challenged the value of the concept of social media and the value in the modern world of in-person professional organizations. I've been inspired to keep to this path.
Great post, Leo. Thanks.
@morate
tmosgarage.blogspot.com
Leo, your post made me think of two recent topics of discussion.
ReplyDelete1. I recently discussed this concept of those afraid to challenge the ideas of superiors, clients, friends, spouses, etc. Obviously, this can get out of hand and it needs to be directed toward a solution. BUT, I find most people being too kind and quietly disagreeing with decisions. This leads to huge problems down the line in all affairs in business and personal relationships. So, speak up everyone, okay!
2. In my early blog life, I was often afraid to challenge conventional views. Lately, I've found a make a greater impact by offering constructive criticism. In recent examples, I challenged the value of the concept of social media and the value in the modern world of in-person professional organizations. I've been inspired to keep to this path.
Great post, Leo. Thanks.
@morate
tmosgarage.blogspot.com
Sean & Terry, you both bring up some excellent points. Failure to engage when you disagree, particularly in a group can over time result in pattern of groupthink that can be toxic to an organization.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the word conflict is an interesting one. For some, the threshold of what's consider conflict may be quite low, while for others it's more intense. As Edward and those commenting on his blog have pointed out, there's a difference between asking good questions and raising issues (hopefully problems as well as solutions, and being regarded as negative and argumentative because you're either shooting down the ideas of others and/or fighting for your own agenda versus something larger - this is where I think you can develop a bad reputation in an organization regardless of how it culturally accepts conflict.
Finally, Sean, you bring up an great point about conflict in different cultures - both in terms of how to engage in it and how to resolve it. We should always be mindful and respectful of our cultural differences. In the end, regardless of one's culture, all parties want to feel respected. If it starts and stays there, resolving conflict with a positive outcome is much more likely.
Recent blog:=- How Do You Manage Conflict?
Leo:
ReplyDeleteCan't say we "coach" people, simply encourage them to speak their mind. Challenge is that in an organization of many mind speakers, listening is often a challenge. One thing I do know is that many companies, even ad agencies, are known for suppressing people who do not agree with management or with their superior. Personally I would never work in a place like that and would discourage others from doing so, too. Unless they're simply direction takers. One great thing about social media is that it equalizes voices if they are good and deserve to be heard. Sure it requires we become adept at expressing our opinion and crafting an argument, but we're supposed to be in the communication business.
Recent blog:=- Can we all stop agreeing with each other and have some arguments please?
I am a product of changing the way I think about that. It's not about my idea not working its about THE idea not working for x reason or y reason. Once I figured that out - all good.
ReplyDeleteRecent undefined:=-
I once worked for an account manager that was very close minded. She had to do everything her way and I had to do everything her way. When I would offer up different ideas I was often struck down in a personal way. She used personal attacks to keep people from "stealing her spotlight." She had worked for the company much longer than I so there was no point in trying to fight her on it, too many people were already convinced that she was the be-all-end-all of account service. However, what I did do was look for ways to improve other clients with my suggestions and earn a reputation for having good ideas with other clients.
ReplyDeleteI guess what I'm saying is that there are times where internalizing is appropriate and times when speaking your mind is appropriate and as long as you do the right thing that the right time then you will be just fine.
Recent undefined:=-
Tiffany, thanks for your thoughtful comments. THE idea versus MY idea allows for everyone to share in the success of collaboration. Great insight! Regarding your second comment, you bring up an excellent point. Most people I know don't take issue with everyone over every point; it's more about the pattern with regard to how we engage people both personally and professionally. I wouldn't presume to speak to your specific situation, but it offers us some food for thought as to how we interact with supervisors. For example, how you broach a sensitive subject could mean the difference between them feeling challenged and they're believing your trying to learn from them. You can raise the same point, but with an entirely different dynamic at work. Because everyone is different, there's no prescription other than to do the very best to understand your audience and proceed from there.
ReplyDeleteRecent blog:=- Why You Should Interview Anyone Who Asks