I was on a very early morning flight a few weeks ago and had dozed off before the plane even took off. When I woke up, I noticed that the person sitting next to me was reading a Harvard Business Review article. I didn’t have my glasses on but I could still make out the distinct “HBR” logo and font.
“What are you reading?”, I asked.
“It’s an oldie but a goodie”, she replied.
The piece was called “How to Pick a Good Fight” and had originally been published in 2009.
I made a mental note of it since it sounded like an interesting piece. Maybe I’d even be able to read it on the flight home – which is exactly what I ended up doing.
The article explores the idea of conflict resolution (obviously a theme close to our hearts at Two Minds Mediation) and the importance of choosing battles wisely in the business context. It also delves into strategies for identifying which issues are worth addressing and how to approach conflicts constructively.
The authors highlight the significance of discerning between essential disagreements that can lead to positive outcomes and those that may be counterproductive. Furthermore, there was an indirect reference to the role of mediation when resolving disputes.
As I read, I found myself highlighting this particular piece.
“The problem is that a peaceful, harmonious workplace can be the worst possible thing for a business … It’s time to stop pretending that conflict-free teamwork is the be-all and end-all of organisational life. It’s time to push employees into the right fights”.
In our practice, we frequently ask the parties contemplating mediation a crucial question.
How comfortable are you with managing conflict?
It’s a spectrum, ranging from very uncomfortable to very comfortable, and it reveals a lot about an individual’s approach to handling disagreements.
Conflict is an inevitable part of any professional environment, arising from differences in perspectives, priorities, or decision-making approaches and there are certain individuals who recognise that resolving conflict constructively can transform it into an opportunity for growth and improvement.
But what about intentionally orchestrating conflict? And no, we don’t mean tossing a metaphorical grenade into (for example) a workplace just to stir things up.
Orchestrated conflict involves purposefully engaging with conflict that naturally arises when tackling complex challenges demanding changes in values, behaviours, or beliefs.
Continuing with the hypothetical workplace scenario, it’s crucial to note that orchestrating conflict is not about turning up the heat on a team or making people so uncomfortable that they self-eject. Conflict, when approached constructively, can lead to the exchange of diverse ideas and viewpoints, sparking innovation and creativity.
By encouraging healthy debate and discussion, colleagues can often arrive at well-informed decisions, strengthen trust and foster better cohesion.
Having said that, not all conflict is beneficial.
Destructive conflict involving hostility and animosity can be detrimental.
Although peaceful and harmonious workplaces aren’t always best for a business, poisonously political environments can be destructive. The authors of the HBR piece don’t recommend colleagues going to extreme lengths to sabotage one another, retaliating against fellow employees, or fighting dirty. We couldn’t agree more. But unfortunately, once a workplace had reached such extremes, often the only solution is mediation.
Orchestrating conflict should be centred around addressing specific complex challenges with intention and skill.
It should enable diverse perspectives to emerge, fuel innovation, and ultimately facilitate the discovery of creative solutions to complex problems.
I also found myself highlighting the following paragraph in the HBR piece.
“A good future facing fight has three qualities. It speaks to what is possible, shifting the debate away from what happened to what could happen. It is compelling, focusing people so intently on real, achievable benefits that they are willing to work through any associated costs and controversies. And it involves uncertainty, because if things are certain, there’s no need to fight”.
These words resonated because there’s a strong correlation between their reference to a “good future fight” and a mediation – particularly when it comes to our role in shifting the conversation towards a future focused outcome.
Before diving into any constructive conflict, it’s important to diagnose the real nature of the challenge. Preparation is key, as issues can be complex, demanding transformative change and a close examination of underlying assumptions.
Resist the urge for a quick fix. By maintaining disciplined attention, it is easier to delve into the root cause of the issue and develop more effective strategies for resolution.
Our process is designed to empower you to address your challenges by facilitating discussion, exploring the conflict in depth from other perspectives, and seeking to reach a personalised solution that has considered various outcomes and consequences.
ABN: 79 669 530 321
