Well, I need help to get my reports out on time.
Hire a temporary secretary.
Wait a minute.
You promised I could work with the next temp we hired.
These conflicts have got to stop.
The folks upstairs say that now we have the option of changing our break time.
Oh, wow, great.
Of course, that also means we have the option of not changing our break time.
Now, can anybody convince me that 10.30 is no good?
Yeah, breaking at 11 would be better for me.
Some days 10 o'clock is better.
So we'll just leave it at 10.30.
Sarah, I'd like to host the monthly meeting this time.
No, Alice.
I'm hosting.
But you did it last time.
You're being unreasonable.
Hosting is my job.
Hello, I'm Tony Fulginitti, Public Relations Editor of Communication Briefings.
And I'm David Byrd, Communication Briefings Advisory Board member.
David, we've just seen three examples of conflict in the workplace.
Right, Tony.
On the job, conflict is rather common.
I'm afraid so, David.
But conflict isn't all bad.
It can actually make us better workers.
Sure, if we manage conflict, when people haggle about who's right and who's wrong, they can't
get things done.
Conflict helps us see and understand differences in attitudes, work styles, and personalities.
And that can make us more productive.
The first step to resolving conflict is recognizing the factors that cause it.
Difficult personalities cause conflict.
People who can't get along with others and those who always must get their way.
When employees clash over values or priorities, sparks usually fly.
Disagreements erupt when one worker doesn't live up to the expectation of another.
Some people need to be recognized.
They stubbornly defend a point because it's the only way they can get any esteem.
Others need to control everything.
When only one opinion rules, expect plenty of conflict.
Some people cause conflict when they defend turf.
Whether it be their department or their employees, it doesn't matter what it is.
And David, let's complete the list with workers who use a double standard on the job.
They enforce rules they won't follow themselves.
Tony, specific techniques for resolving conflicts do exist.
And if we return to the office conflict over who gets the new temp, we'll see how some
of these techniques work.
Well I need help to get my reports out on time.
Hire a temporary secretary.
Wait a minute.
You promised I could work with the next temp we hired.
These conflicts have got to stop.
So settle this one.
I asked first.
Asking first doesn't mean anything.
The person with the greatest need should get the help.
Okay.
Who has the greatest need?
I do.
Oh, you always have the greatest need.
And you always have the latest need.
Tony, these folks are too busy defending their turf.
They get behind hard positions, then they feel they have to defend them.
One of the hardest things in resolving disputes is keeping personality out of the issue.
They might also try to use a third party, a mediator, to solve their problem.
Let someone else decide for the good of the organization.
Or they can impose a deadline on themselves.
After all, if you keep wasting time on building conflict, everyone eventually loses.
They can use the best alternative method.
Either manager can get the new employee or they can hire two half-time employees.
They can even share the temp for a while.
These workers need to decide that they'll win for the organization, not for themselves.
So far, they've stayed away from each other.
Only when they decide to come together will they stop defending turf and solve the problem.
Right, David.
More conflicts are resolved by solving problems for the organization rather than by negotiating
for oneself.
Let's see if this conflict can be resolved through a mediator.
The boss filled me in on the problem.
Then you know we only have an hour to settle this.
All right.
Let's agree that I'll try to mediate, but if that fails, I can decide what's best for
the organization.
Okay.
I'm still not happy that I was promised help first and now may not get it.
I suggest you each make your strongest arguments for your case without getting personally involved.
Remember, this is a business, not a social club.
Right.
Let's get started.
That's perfect, Tony.
They're off to a great start.
That's right, David.
They used the three techniques we suggested.
They used a third party, in this case, Mary.
They imposed a deadline.
Here that was one hour.
And finally, they sought the best alternative, what's good for the organization.
They came together, then they decided to win for the organization and work on solving problems
instead of negotiating for themselves.
Let's return to the factory and see why conflict develops when one person has power over another.
The folks upstairs say that now we have the option of changing our break time.
Oh, wow.
Great.
Of course, that also means we have the option of not changing our break time.
Now, can anybody convince me that 10.30 is no good?
Yeah, breaking at 11 would be better for me.
Some days 10 o'clock is better.
So we'll just leave it at 10.30.
Wait a minute.
What would you do if the people at the main office ordered you to let us take our break
at 11?
I'd tell them that it wasn't convenient for everybody, so we're going to leave things
just the way they are.
Well, that's not fair.
You're asking us to compromise something you wouldn't do yourself.
But I'm not being ordered to do it, and life isn't fair.
Now, if you want, we can take our break now and call it the 10.30 break, just for today.
Let's get some coffee.
Tony, this is a tough one.
When bosses and employees disagree, can employees ever win?
And if they win, does the employer lose?
David, no one has to be a loser.
No one has to be wrong.
This boss must eliminate the need to control his employee.
That's the chief cause for employer-employee disagreements when either party feels manipulated
by the other.
These employees also feel that two standards are being used, one for the boss and another
for them, to resolve their conflict, both the boss and the employees must surrender
controlling the other in favor of influencing the other.
Controlling makes people defensive.
Influencing makes people cooperative.
They need to interpret the situation the same way.
In this scene, the employer saw his approach as a way to avoid confusion.
The employees saw the chance to change things as a convenience, even a small perk.
To resolve conflict, each party can ask, what is it I really want, and what's the least
I will accept?
In this case, the employer might admit that he really wants to leave the time unchanged.
He's ready to accept an occasional change, but what about the employees?
The employees want a new break time, but it sounds like they have different ideas of when
that new time is.
They might discover that they agree with their boss on something.
The least the boss can accept matches the least the employees can accept, keeping the
regular break time while allowing for occasional changes.
And that would resolve the conflict.
Let's see.
And if I join you, can we still discuss the break?
What else is there to say?
Look, you're the boss.
We'll do whatever you say, but can we compromise?
How?
How many times a month I have to call home around 11?
I can live with that if we can still stop at 10 every once in a while.
And if we can live with the changes, it might cut the stress that we feel when things get
hectic.
Yeah.
Okay.
If you give me plenty of notice, and remember that the regular break time is still 1030,
I'll go along with it.
Fine with me.
That's great.
Yeah.
Well, I guess we all get what we want.
Yeah.
Tony, they could have decided that from the beginning.
Maybe they couldn't.
Sometimes people have to take a position, say how they see things, and try to control
others before they decide to go along.
The employees resolved the conflict when they traded control for influence.
But the employees and the boss needed to see things from each other's point of view.
Let's look at another situation that's led to conflict.
Sarah, I'd like to host the monthly meeting this time.
No, Alice.
I'm hosting.
But you did it last time.
You're being unreasonable.
Hosting is my job.
But the group needs to see how organized I can be.
Can't we both do it this time?
I'm up for a promotion.
I need to impress the group.
So do I.
Tony, Alice needs to be recognized.
But all Sarah cares about is her own advancement.
We've got a tough personality going against a sensitive one.
Sarah is using a double standard.
If the shoe were on the other foot, she'd be asking to host the meeting.
They could try reversing roles.
That could work here.
Reversing roles is like trading places.
Two people negotiate in such a way that each person imagines being the other person.
Here, Alice would know what Sarah will feel like after they make a decision.
And Sarah will understand Alice's point of view.
Reversing roles guarantees a fair deal for either person.
Or they might take turns.
But taking turns works only if the personalities allow it.
For example, Alice and Sarah need to recognize certain goals they have in common.
They aren't natural enemies, always destined to fight or disagree.
Good point.
Sometimes we forget that getting something we want doesn't mean someone else loses.
Let's see how they solve the problem.
I couldn't help overhear you two.
Sarah won't give me a chance to host the monthly meeting.
Why not, Sarah?
I've been doing it from the beginning.
The group expects me to continue.
Can't Alice take this meeting and you take the next?
No, this isn't a turn thing.
Why not?
I worked for my turn.
I built my reputation.
Well, how can I build mine if I don't get a chance?
That's a good point.
Sarah, did anybody ever give you a chance?
Well, yes.
You did.
When this was your job.
Let's try something.
Come with me.
In here, I want you to forget who you are.
I want you to imagine that when you leave this room, Sarah could either be the regular
hostess or the person who wants her first chance.
And Alice could be the person who's eager to host her first meeting or she could be
the veteran.
Now, let's negotiate.
When I leave, I could be Alice and get my chance?
Right.
And when I leave, I could be Sarah and lose my hostess job?
Right.
Okay.
I would feel great if I were Alice and we decided to let me host the meeting.
And I would feel awful if I were Sarah and lost my hostess job.
Reach a decision you both can live with no matter who you are when you leave this room.
I don't think you need me anymore.
I'm sure you'll do the right thing.
It's revealing what reversing roles will do to conflict.
All right, David.
It's time for our viewers to test their style of dealing with conflict.
Let's suppose that you work for XYZ Company, a big place with its own stockroom of office
supplies for employees.
You're hoping Rosa, stockroom clerk, can help you with your boss's order.
I'm sorry.
We have no record of Ms. Santo's order.
That's absurd.
How do you run things around here?
Get your supervisor.
If you blame others for your problems, you won't be popular on the job.
You're not a let's get together person.
And blamers never discover how they might themselves contribute to conflict.
In this case, maybe no one sent the order.
I'm sorry.
We ran out of that item.
Okay.
I'll go out at lunch and buy it.
You can avoid conflict by solving your problem for yourself.
But constructive conflict here might have resulted in a better stocked supply room.
Avoiders may not lose, but they won't win either.
I'm sorry.
We need three days to process orders, and this is only the second day.
My boss needs the supplies today.
Maybe we can work something out.
Who's ahead of me on the list?
Looks like Anderson in accounts payable.
I'll explain the emergency.
Maybe he'll switch with me.
When you stop blaming and avoiding and instead focus on issues, you'll resolve a lot of conflict
on the job.
Changers are popular let's get together people.
David, we've covered a lot of ground.
Let's conclude with the best attitudes to resolve conflict on the job.
Be generous.
Make certain everyone gets something from the conflict.
Don't send people away empty handed.
Be a consensus builder.
Make people feel that even if they don't get what they want, they're not losers or wrong.
Respect everyone's values.
Act the way you want others to act toward you.
Don't impose your values on others.
Be a problem solver for the organization.
Don't be merely a negotiator for yourself.
Be a peacemaker.
Resolving conflict begins by not making war on coworkers.
Reverse roles.
If you get on both sides of an issue, you've already built a bridge to your coworkers.
Good luck in getting together with others.
It's the best way.