What's the best way to find the source of a workplace conflict?

I always say, “Wherever you find people you find problems” because conflict is an inevitable byproduct of human interactions and relationships. For this reason, when investigating employee conflicts or when facilitating unconscious bias and bullying and harassment trainings, I teach employees that lateral violence such as public humiliation, belittling, excessive criticism, retaliation, and exclusion from one’s team are not part of their job description. Simultaneously, I teach employees the importance of practicing self-reflection because our own biases, assumptions, and traumas can lead to conflict and misunderstandings. Thus, we must always “Seek first to understand,” be respectful, and assume positive intent until we learn otherwise.

To effectively identify the source of a workplace conflict, it's essential to take a systematic and empathetic approach. We can begin by actively listening to the parties involved, creating a safe space for them to express their concerns. Gathering information to gain a comprehensive understanding of the conflict's dynamics. Reviewing company policies, procedures, and external factors that might have contributed to the issue. Assessing the organizational culture and leadership style's impact on conflicts, and documenting the findings. Finally, proposing and implementing solutions, emphasizing open communication and compromising to address both the immediate and underlying issues.

1 Corinthians 12:21-26 The eye cannot say to the hand, 'I don't need you!" And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!" It is always professional to try communicate with the person first to resolve the issue. If that can't be done find a unbiased person and ask them to sit in on the conversation. As professionals in the workplace we are "ALL" there for a specific purpose. If one of us fails we all fail. It's teamwork. vs. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers!" Each person has a special talent, there is no need to be envious or jealous because someone does something better. Focus on what you are good at. Ask for assistantance if there are things you want to improve in, most people are willing to educate others.

Certainly, we can look for the root cause of the conflict, first. However, what caused the conflict? Most of the time, leaders are blamed. There could be processes, regulations and/or external factors. Change is constant. I have found that change helps us to move forward. Once we determine the cause and effect of the conflict, we can work towards making sure we extinguish it for good. Create an environment that works for all. Don’t treat the symptoms of conflict, cure them. Make sure as a leader you examine your intentions, thoughts, actions and reactions, as well. Hopefully, the conflict is not your reflection.

We cannot ignore the fact the conflict is inevitable nor can we ignore the fact there are times conflict is necessary and unavoidable. Conflict is as old as biblical times. We have been given a model for addressing conflict that most will avoid. Often we find ourselves in a place of sharing the conflict with everyone except the person involved. Lastly. if we were the only person on earth. there would be conflict because often what we deal with is internal.

One thing I have found helpful in avoiding conflict is going to curious instead of frustrated. If conflict arises, I might ask questions like, "can you please help me understand why you did it this way?" By asking appropriate questions and listening actively and empathetically, you demonstrate that you are willing to understand each party.

Empathy is a two-way street built on mutual understanding. It’s an exchange of our most important beliefs and experiences. Being vulnerable with our needs and feelings requires removing our masks and revealing our feelings. This is vital for creating a healthy work environment.

Listening to perspectives and understanding the vantage point of different individuals or teams could add a lot of value, this could also point to conflicts that are, at the very base of it, are process or conflicting responsibilities. Listening to different perspectives and then summarising what we found to the larger group could bring interesting insights and people may realise that not every issue was related to the person or team they thought it was, infact majority was in the way we were setup for success.

I tend to do 30 minutes interviews with all staff in that department. I would ask questions such as: Where have you experienced any areas of disagreement, tension or conflict? What do you think caused the issue? This keeps the questions open enough so any factors that may not have been considered could be raised. Often we find that the managers/CEOs have one idea of what causes the conflict, but it is often more complex than that. Open questions help to reveal other contributing factors.

Often I find that causes can also be externally influenced. External pressures, such as family dynamics, health issues, financial issues, political or global events, etc., may not be the sole cause but can greatly impact how a person responds or manages in other areas. It is important to consider the whole of the individual. If external factors are identified, where possible and appropriate, provide resources to address this.

Once the group understand the dynamics and different vantage points, the same group of experts could collaborate and create a plan to solve it. You see, majority of the long term conflicts are not because one or more the parties involved are right or wrong, majority of ping running conflicts arises from the fact that both or all involved are correct from their own vantage point. And then the key is to identify the once’s that should be resolved first, May be the once’s at the beginning of the value chain, or the ones that create the max impact. That however, is depending on the Prioratization approach one wants to adapt/adopt.

Once the findings are available to look at holistically, it’s important to validate through available data or facts. Both the validity of the finding and the priority it claims. It’s just as simple as identifying the critical Xs in Y= f (x1, x2, x……) this is also critical from ROI point of view. After all you don’t want to start tackling the wrong problem, as this may not only not solve the problem, but in many cases may elevate the problem to a great extent. A good practice could be a mix of AHP+Fibonacci series to create a eco nave based prioritisation model.

Generating a solution is a comprehensive and collaborative excel use, this should be done keeping in mind all relevant stakeholders that will or may get impacted by the solution. Also, cross functional viewpoint is important across the value chain. You don’t want to solve a problem and create a new one coz of the solution. This is where you would like to use a comprehensive toolset and techniques from a design thinking, solutions vantage point.

Leadership often believes that they are separate from the workplace conflict; that they just have to “manage” it. But, leaders need to self reflect and ask what about their leadership style contributed to this conflict? Unclear expectations? Nepotism? Allowing certain staff to get away with behaviors that impact the group dynamic? Failing to address smaller conflicts? Expecting the team to “handle it”? Leaders need to be open to the fact that they may be one of the sources of conflict if their team feels like there is inequity among peers or avoidance of issues.

We very rarely have training in how to give difficult feedback or receive it well. This can be a source of conflict in many workplaces, especially if people avoid addressing poor behaviour because they don’t know how to address it. We need more companies to provide this sort of training and model it well.

I recall addressing a concern once, with an open question which was precisely this…”I’m not sure if this is what was intended by…(fill in the blank with what action/words were offensive)…but this is how it landed with me”. This offered the individual I was speaking with a ‘way out’ as opposed to an accusation which would have placed them in a challenging defence mode. The work relationship improved immensely thereafter ??????!