How do you manage conflict with peers and followers?

First, people need to recognize when conflict is not being acknowledged. Most corporate cultures are passive-aggressive, due to: - Individual agendas - Lack of psychological safety to speak up - Leaders not modeling TRUE active listening - Lack of leaders truly listening to different perspectives - Maturity to be vulnerable about not knowing To me, healthy conflict is about: - Owning our agenda openly (we always have them) - Modeling psychological safety by revealing deep truths - Pausing when others speak - Responding vs. reacting - Owning our individual and systemic shadows* * Shadows, thanks to Carl Jung, are those things we hide, suppress and deny. (word count says I should stop, so I will) :)

Models are there to guide us. When dealing with we must deal with Human intelligence. Here are few things to remember: -> Be clear on what you want is open for negotiation and what is non-negotiable. -> Enter the conversation with the intention of creating a WIN-WIN outcome -> Seek first to understand and then to be understood. ->Build rapport first by using phrases like "I see your point of view", or "I agree and" -> Use the power of silence and questions to understand the other person's non-negotiables truly -> Kill the need to resolve the conflict. 'Need' only leads to frustration.

For either conflict resolution model, remember it is not like baking a cake. There is no recipe that will guarantee certain results within a certain timeframe. Good results come from a willingness to commit the time required to gain trust. Getting to the heart of the issue is a lot like pealing an onion, one layer at at time. Once you understand that the true issues on out on the table, take time to withdraw from discussion and process. Conflict resolution is not behavior modification. It is relationship building within the team in order to benefit the organization's objectives.

I find it useful to think in terms of disagreement and conflict. Disagreement is a good thing - the more the better. It's a sign of collective intelligence and creativity at work. It is divergent and brings in new possibilities, providing it does not develop into conflict. Conflict, in my experience, is a breakdown of respect in which ideas are conflated with the people expressing them. Individuals over-identify with beliefs which when challenged, feels like an existential attack. It destroys ideas and relationships. Once you understand this, models and processes become redundant.

The first step is to see conflict as an opportunity. The fact that a conflict is visible and obvious is already progress. If it out in the open, then it can be solved! A conflict is an opportunity to understand someone’s point of view and to build a bridge to find common ground.

Like the Great John C. Maxwell says, "Leadership is influence, nothing more, and nothing less." Take responsibility that the Leadership Role you may possess is a duty to serve in helping people (and in some cases) organizations grow. Sharing High Value and Belief in others along with the Emotional support that everyone is at a different point in their professional and personal journey's will go a long way. Empowering the people you serve through a strong sense of empathy and providing them with autonomy and encouragement will help future Leaders Develop and Inspire a Healthy work culture that is bigger than any one individual. This type of Leadership is the kind that people want to follow.

I think it is more than leadership style. I believe it is leadership behavior. Behavior that is trustworthy, interdependent, genuine, empathetic, risk resolving and successful in recognizing coworker and employee achievements creates the relationship that can weather considerable strain including getting to the bottom of issues that reside at the root cause of misunderstanding.

The question of leadership style is incomplete unless you include an understanding of motive. A choice in how we show up as a leader will be far more authentic when we understand how to establish motive based relationships. The insight being our ability to understand our motive (how we prioritize the motives of performance, people, and process) and how the person we are in a leadership relationship with prioritizes these motives. When we understand the relationship at the level of motive we can then consider the context and better understand why we see the issue differently. Changing behavior without understanding the motive of both people makes others feel less safe, not more safe.

Leaders should always remember that they are not responsible for others behaviour. If two of your people are in conflict, your only responsibility is to make it clear to them that they are totally responsible for their relationship and the conflict within it. You can then remind them that fostering harmonious and constructive relationships with others is part of their (unwritten) job spec. If they can't do this, they can't do their jobs. I have seen this work miraculously, as opposed to leaders trying desperately (and failing) to change others' behaviour by taking responsibility for it.

I think the most powerful leadership model is knowing Who You Really Are. In other words, it's about transcending egoic (false self) perspectives of fear and insecurity. Over time, we gain access to the peace, clarity and freedom of our True Self.

Listening actively, not just to the words, but also for the emotion and intent behind the words is critical. It goes a long way to understanding what is truly important and is at the heart of the conflict, and what it would take for both sides to resolve it.

Listening is a skill. This is what is often what is missing in communication. A Leader's experience bias leads them to make assumptions that drive their direct reports nuts. You have to listen 1st.

I would add that communication needs to be directed to understanding. Through understanding both the situation and the inconvenience or emotion driving the misunderstanding takes empathy and good listening skills. So communication without listening and questioning is too one-way and can result in passive aggressive consequences.

Effective communication is key. It is possible that the lack of communication, or clarity in what is being communicated, is the actual cause of the issue(s). It is also possible that some/ all affected parties have legitimate concerns that need to be redressed. Though without a clear understanding of these concerns, this may be missed. Common causes of such issues can be due to language. Including when affected parties do not have a common primary language. Alternatively, when communication is between Technical and non-technical savvy individuals, for example. In both cases it helps to have someone who can clearly 'translate' the alternative points/ concerns to all relevant parties. As well as clarify the next/ corrective steps.

I choose this topic among others due to this is happening to me recently and I would like to share my experience; communication has been one of main issue in conflict, often the way you express and explain things, how you address an issue to different type of people (teammates or peers or your leader) play important roles to either create or solve a conflict. Another consideration would be to filter information before communicating: is it necessary? or is it reliable? Often people listen half, understand quarter and talk double, which is why we need to listen first before talking to avoid any kind of conflicts. The higher your position in an organization, the more you are required to be assertive and respectful to others.

Using De Bono's Six Thinking Hats - parallel thinking strategy removes most of the need for negotiated settlements. When all parties are seeing each others perspectives and values, it is easy to get buy-in and ownership - even on tough issues.

In the spirit of being a broken record, we will struggle to truly be open-minded unless we root our relationships in the understanding of motive. Unless we can consider the core motives of people, performance, and process and see the issue from the varied perspectives we will hold fast to our own view and negotiation will be transactional, not relational. When we are able consider the context with an ability and appreciation for all three core motives, we see new ways forward and the negotiation and collaboration field expands in a meaningful and powerful way. To better understand motive based relationships go to www.corestrengths.com

The foundational experience of the ego is ????????????????????. From this perspective, we see the "other" an opponent...a problem to be solved. Through the process of self-inquiry, we begin to see beyond these limiting patterns toward the realization that the ways in which we are the same are far greater (and more useful) than how we appear to be separate.

A powerful way to learn from conflict is to notice the way that you experience that conflict in your body. Generally (unless we are quite evolved ??), we'll experience conflict as some degree of ?????????????? in the body. Learning to be present with that experience, ?????????????? ???? ???? ????, can teach you a lot about yourself.

In addition to learning - there is unlearning. All of this requires vulnerability based trust. It requires us to be open to making mistakes. It asks us to be bring humility and courage to the conversation.

Conflict is a window into understanding what matters most, both for us and for others. The gift of conflict is it reveals what truly matters. If we add the understanding of motive and conflict as a threat to our self-worth, we can accelerate the "storming" stage for a team or in a relationship and make it far more meaningful. As we understand conflict, we expand our skill of maintaining positive regard for ourselves and others, and this positive regard is powerful because it is deeply genuine. To develop the skill of maintaining positive regard at the individual, relationship, and team level go to www.corestrengths.com

Learn to listen radically and generously. Learn to listen first and speak second. In any situation, who are you BEING? Be a source for acknowledgment and appreciation.

Practice the art of listening first and speaking last, making a concerted effort to understand all perspectives involved. When you do speak, let honesty and empathy drive your words. Focus on the issue and facts rather than the individual, and recognize that conflicts tend to become more challenging with time, so address them promptly to prevent unnecessary escalation. Remember that the ultimate goal is not to "win" at the expense of others but to foster genuine understanding. By wholeheartedly embracing active listening, honesty, and empathy, you can cultivate an environment where conflicts become opportunities for growth and collaboration, rather than roadblocks to success.

In collaborative operations, time spent collectively deciding on behavior and procedure group norms is a worthwhile endeavor. This minimizes procedural misunderstandings that can quickly flame into goal conflict and from there relationship conflict. In collaborative operations the idea is for coworkers to work through these misunderstandings without the team leader or manager having to referee.

Seek to understand. Recognize when you are making assumptions about the person or situation and instead of doing that, ask questions. Explain your perspective and identify how the action impacted you.

This article is jargonist with list of different theories for leadership and conflict negationation. In terms of the title. It was really interesting and some of the quotes. Howver, it becomes a difficult reading, uninteresting and very less retainable information for actually practical implementation in real worl when dealing with a a virtual workspace.