Conflict Among Teams

Conflict Among Teams

Michelle Thornhill

GEN 300

Diane Ellison

October 9, 2006

Conflict Among Teams

Differences of opinion exist in every organization and in every work group. Among the many factors which influence differences of opinion are the personal philosophy and values, differing strategies, and varying sources of information. A variety of opinions are beneficial to a team, causing team members to think about new and different ideas or to change old patterns into new ones. Differences of opinion do not cause conflicts. Misunderstanding does. Misunderstanding usually arises from miscommunication, by keeping hostilities “inside,” misinterpreting what someone said, not acknowledging another’s right to a different opinion, or by someone saying something they did not really mean. Managing team conflicts does not mean to eliminate misunderstandings altogether, but to help team members control stress, improve communication, and apply sensible solutions to conflict.

Though a diversity of personalities is essential to high-performance teamwork, and no matter how well a team is doing, there may be team members displaying disruptive behaviors. Any behavior that shifts the team’s focus, besides inhibiting the team’s growth, can provoke conflict. Herbelin (2000) divides the disruptive behaviors into five distinct groups: the quiet withholder, the bully, the attention-grabber, the joker, and the pessimist. The quite withholder is the team member who refuses to participate in team discussions. This person could be a shy, reflective person, or one who has not yet grown comfortable with the team environment. A bully attempts to inflate their status at the expense of others, usually because of poor self-esteem or an ego problem. An attention grabber is always trying to impress the team with how knowledgeable and valuable he or she is. Jokers try to call attention to themselves by clowning around and mimicking others. Although they may, at times, be rewarded with grins and laughter, their disrespectful behavior is an irritant to the team. The pessimist is always looking for things to complain about, putting a negative spin in just about any situation or plan.

Prevention is the first and best step in resolving conflicts within workgroups. There are several prevention methods. Foremost, the roles and responsibilities of all in the team must be clearly defined, and all members need to understand why particular procedures are in place. Encouragement for team members to support each other by openly sharing their knowledge and to exchange ideas, techniques, and helpful tips reduces the chances of another team member becoming offended when an error is pointed out or different suggestion is made. The team as a whole should discuss methods of conflict resolution, not assume one or a few to take on the task of mediating all misunderstandings. “It’s important to set norms for team communication early in the process, “says Grieder and Leahy (2005). Opportunity to react enables more effective conflict recognition and handling on distributed teams (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005).

Sessa (1994) divides conflict into two different categories: task oriented and people oriented. Task oriented conflict concerns ideas and procedures of the work at hand, while people oriented conflict results from leadership disputes, variant workloads between team members, and diverse personalities. The effect each type has on the team members is noticeably different. When arguments are centered on the task itself, team members can separate themselves from the conflict and usually hold a neutral to positive tone. Once the dispute turns personal, however, negative feelings arise. Individuals in a positive mood are more apt to flourish than those in a negative one, because they are more likely to focus on success.

After identifying the type of conflict and the particular issue at hand, one should look towards mediation processes. If found necessary, sufficient time should be allowed for each party to cool down and collect themselves. Those involved will then see things more clearly and, in all likelihood, will be more eager to resolve their differences. There are two options when teams are allowed to make their own decisions, without a mediator: voting and consensus (What to do about conflicts, 1995). Voting, although quicker, can promote division within the team. A consensus takes a bit of time to carry out, but everyone supports the final decision in the end.

Conflict resolution is most difficult when the dispute involves incompatibly opposing views from which neither side will budge. Pitting