Why do some organizations successfully work through change and the turbulence that come with it while others don’t? One answer is found in how well leadership manages conflict, particularly when it involves staff. Nobody likes conflict and we go to great lengths to avoid it. But if important changes must be made in an organization – whether it’s about direction and priorities, budget cuts or key personnel changes – conflict is to be expected. It’s like gardens and weeds. One goes with the other. No way around it.
This article highlights the differences between leadership that is change and conflict literate or skilled and leadership that isn’t, including three key practices that define the differences.
As we often hear, change is hard, particularly when an organization wants to make a big shift and runs into a common barrier – staff resistance and conflict. It’s to be expected. But there are leaders who handle the barrier well and guide the organization through the turbulence in a healthy way. These leaders are change and conflict literate or skilled. And then there are leaders who are not. These leaders frequently make decisions that only inflame the tension and conflict that comes with change. So, what’s the difference between the skilled leader who’s good at balancing change and conflict and the, let’s say, less skilled leader?
Recently I worked with a multi-service nonprofit that had to stabilize and restructure one of its core services to keep the doors open for the future. The restructuring process kicked up an understandable amount of tension, anxiety and conflict. The process was hard. But leadership and staff stood up to the challenges, landed on a shared vision for the future and moved the change forward in a good way.
Many things contributed to this success story, but here are three key practices that leadership embraced to reach a positive outcome. These practices are part of being change and conflict skilled.
- Treated conflict as normal – Leadership expected conflict, accepted it and prepared for it. Meaningful change means disruption. If an organization truly wants to make meaningful changes, it is going to come with resistance, tension and conflict. That’s normal.
- Found opportunity in conflict – The conflicts that arose led to tough conversations with staff, but those discussions also generated better ideas about the service’s future vision and restructuring, not to mention solid staff buy-in. Trying to ignore or dismiss conflict is a sure way to inflame it.
- Approached conflict with open communications – Leadership supported open dialogue and the free flow of information essential to guiding any conflict to a healthy result. Withholding information and stifling difficult discussions only creates distrust and lack of confidence in leadership.
Here are three of my favorite resources for helping leaders build change and conflict literacy:
- Getting To Yes, Negotiating Agreements Without Giving In, Fisher, Ury, Patton, 2011
- Bohm On Dialogue, Bohm, 1996
- The Dynamics of Conflict, A Guide to Engagement and Intervention, Mayer, 2012
If you’re interested in learning more about change and conflict literacy, send me an email at rene@allinstrategies.com. I find this work very powerful and appreciate the positive impact it has on organizations and people grappling with change. I hope to hear from you.