What are the best practices for managing conflicts in a crisis?

I certainly look for why a conflicting situation arise in a team. Is it bullying or difference in opinion based on culture or organizational leadership ?? Kill that syndrome. Kilmann style is appropriate in western style of work. Not seen any conflicting situation in Japanese or Chinese Organisation. Then comes the situation control. Commented based on my experience.

The most important thing to prioritize during a crisis is security and stability. It is important to assess the real and perceived risks to all involved to understand everyone's motives. All people will search for their need of security first. Once those are identified then bringing stability to where there is insecurity will stabilize those involved. Then better decisions, choices and ultimately outcomes can be achieved in a more collaborative manner. Eliminating as much risk as possible will increase a more streamlined, efficient approach towards bringing peace to the crisis.

The crisis usually has a beginning, a messy middle and an end. Based on Mitroff's crisis model, organizations can begin by finding out the cause of the conflict, probe it for details and draw up plans for mitigating it. The crisis has a life cycle of its own. It does not appear one day and disappear the next day. There is a time for recovery. Post that, it is important to record the key learnings and an action plan for similar crisis in the future. Most issues are related to specific areas of concern. We should be able to categorize such conflicts together and arrive at the cause as well as the possible course of action.

Listen to understand the thoughts and feelings being expressed by the parties. This will help get to the core of the issue and to reduce defensiveness. Help avoid dichotomies (either/or), especially false dichotomies participants might be creating. It can help to preview with the parties the approach you will take, in order to reduce their reticence. People feel better with a "road map. "Remember, most of us have emotions heightened by conflict. We tend not to be good at it because we tend to avoid it (we don't practice). We tend to avoid it because we aren't good at it. The cycle continues...

Any conflict or disagreement that leads to a fallout in the workplace is best avoided, before the situation reaches a boiling point. Although inevitable, this can be managed effectively when peers, colleagues are bonded to identify any conflicting situation that may impact the environment as a whole. My take is simply to take precautions to de-escalate whenever possible. When not, and in a crisis situation, call for truce until normalcy is gained. Another take, conflict are also good at times, as it helps everyone clear the air, be their true self and take a stand. For many roles, I would definitely look to welcome individuals with these traits, e.g. quality assurance, audit etc.

Communication is the key to resolve conflicts. Every stakeholder must be identified through creating a stakeholder’s matrix. They should be communicated based on their individual interest and influence on the conflict. Knowing them better will help in methodology of communication.

Communication is very key. Both listening and responding. We should have active listening and spend quality and uninterrupted time to assess the criticality of the situation, so that we can derive the best solution to it. We should not use offensive language and special care needs to be taken on that.

It’s not just a case of those leading the conflict resolution who need to communicate effectively, they need to facilitate clear communication from the parties involved. Both parties need to fully understand the perspectives of each other, and their routes out of conflict.

I often have each party explain their understanding of the other party's perspective and concerns. They must do that to the OTHER party's satisfaction. If there is inter-group conflict, I separate the groups and have each prepare a presentation regarding how they contribute to mission, how they see the others contribute to mission, how they see themselves getting in the other group's way and how they see the other group getting in their way. I bring the groups together and have them present to each other. Neither side is allowed to question the other (except if they misunderstand meaning). Normally, this helps create clarity and opens the path to communication.

One thing I’ve found useful to us shift one’s language from ‘you’ focused to ‘I’ focused. And zone into the facts about what actually happened (observable data) and share how you feel about what happened. An example of this is rather than saying ‘you’re rude’ say something like ‘when you did or said x, I felt upset about it.’ This way, you’re owning your feelings and focusing on the observed experience. You can ask the person their view, and aim to really listen to what happened for them and why. From here you might ask them for what you want in a future scenario. For example, going forward, I’d appreciate it if you …. ‘

In my experience the easiest way to get those in conflict is to openly admit what they like or respect about the other person. Ideally a list of 3-5 traits will diffuse the tension and put their mindsets into one that’s more open to collaboration.

In my master's thesis, I examined the correlation between conflicts and innovation. I found that teams capable of constructive conflict resolution are more innovative. Handling conflicts effectively unlocks our potential for progress. Neuroscientist Dr. Gerald Hüther emphasizes that genuine connections foster more than cooperation; they enable co-creation. This necessitates psychological safety, trust, and collaborative frameworks. Despite conflicts persisting, they are essential for advancement. Well-managed conflicts and a co-creative approach are the keys to innovation.

I think for the individuals involved who are struggling to move forward with collaboration or the process, reframing may help. It could be healthy and effective to reframe the situation or your beliefs about the person, other side and parties involved. Looking at things in a black and white manner or one dimensional will only block the parties from seeking a resolve that meets the needs of all parties. Reframing can be a powerful tool for empathy and compassion and allowing people to see the other side. Reframing is a healthy conflict resolution tool that can lead to a better win-win resolution and help people feel better about working with the other side or parties involved.

In conflict management, recognizing that conflict always have clear triggers is vital. Our actions can trigger a cycle of negative behaviors in conflicts. So, the key question is whether we adopt a positive or negative mindset. Negatively, we enter a cycle, oscillating between avoidance and escalating tensions, seeking to assert ourselves as victors. Or we might accept the situation due to a sense of weakness. These are the three conflict management styles With a positive mindset, we move towards collaboration. It involves certainty and active listening using dialogue as a crucial tool. Dialogue allows us to express our viewpoint transparently, aiming to find solutions that resolve the issue and reduce tension.

This part is the most important in conflict situation. A good leader must adapt the holistic approach toward a common goal of the organisation. Every stakeholder might have own interest and thus can create conflict. Identification of the common goal and propose tailored solution keeping everyone on the same page will make the task convenient and consistent for organisation’s development.

In my organization, part of the service is to do "coaching over coffee." We follow up and monitor in an informal situation. The only "tuition" for this session is that they buy the coffee. Unless it becomes a long session, at which point they are on the hook for a cinnamon roll.

At work, one should be treated as adult and one should carry oneself as one too. Unlike in school, support & followup should be made available to all, but offered only when the conflicting parties reach out for it. We accept, listen to others, only when we open our mind to listen, and as we grow older (become more mature) we become rigid with our beliefs too. So, unless the conflicting individuals reach out for help, any help offered will not yield desired results.

Following up is crucial when managing conflict in a crisis because it helps ensure that resolutions are implemented and that any lingering issues or concerns are addressed. It also allows opportunities to keep communication ongoing to further prevent any issues.

Completely agree with Andy, it should not be seen as an escalation. It’s similar to coaching in that, many seem to view coaching as a tool for when things aren’t going right and need correction. This paints a negative view of a fantastic opportunity to increase performance, without the stigma of somebody ‘needing’ coaching. Mediation should be encouraged at all stages and all levels, maybe even in the form of psychological safety where people can openly discuss their concerns or conflicting views, without the requirement of third party intervention.

In my opinion meditation should not be considered purely as an escalation. Depending on the situation, parties involved, or skill of those leading the resolution, professional meditation may be the best option early in the process. Reluctance to lean into meditation could be a naive move.

Depending on the nature of the conflict, interventions can be looked into. But, escalation sounds severe. We need to agree that as working professionals, any conflict that impacts our ability to be productive and submit quality work needs immediate attention. Be it through talking & listening, or by way of problem solving - the matter needs to be taken care of. Escalation is not an option in internal conflicts.

Effective Communication: Open, honest, and transparent communication is crucial. It ensures that everyone is on the same page, understands the situation, and can express their concerns and ideas. Maintaining Composure and Empathy: Leaders and team members alike need to stay calm and composed, even in high-stress situations. Additionally, showing empathy towards others' perspectives and challenges helps build trust and understanding. Timely Resolution: Addressing conflicts promptly is essential. Delaying resolution can allow issues to escalate, potentially causing further disruption and strain on the team.

Data can tell you what is happening, but it often can't tell you why. Understanding the 'why' often requires a level of emotional intelligence that machines can't yet replicate. In a crisis, emotional stakes are high, and the data may show increased conflicts, decreased productivity, or higher turnover. While these metrics are invaluable for understanding the impact, they fall short of offering a complete picture. This is where emotional intelligence comes in. By understanding the emotions driving the actions, leaders can address the root cause, not just the symptoms.

Seek to Understand! Too often we focus our efforts on how to best communicate OUR needs so that WE get heard. Many times over, this is extremely selfish because it implies that MY perspective is priority. We need to spend more time and effort asking good questions, getting information, and seeking to understand the other side. Once others feel heard and understood we are more likely to elicit compassion, empathy, or even patience when we share our perspective. Most importantly, the practice of pausing our own ego so that others can be heard, builds patience, de-escalates emotions, and allows for reflection. Relationship based leadership holds space for others because we know that our professional relationship is not dictatorship!

Conflict should be encouraged. This is about creating space for healthy debate, disagreement, varying viewpoints and perspectives. This is the building block for a vibrant high performance organizational culture. If you’re a manager or leader, look out for how frequently and vigorously your people debate ideas. This will tell you a lot about the level of trust and safety in the team(s).