Peacemakers Don’t Get in Trouble
"It is through cooperation, rather than conflict, that your greatest successes will be derived." - Ralph Charell
"When you build bridges, you can keep crossing them." ~Rick Pitino
Picking a fight is a dicey proposition. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, and most of the time there is unanticipated fallout down the road. Most of us can come up with examples of those who reached the pinnacle of their organization by picking fights, however, most of us can cite far more examples of those who worked with other members of the team for the benefit of the greater good. Some organizations recognize and reward those who pick fights and win, but most consider this an immature move that at best shows confidence, and at worst shows just how ill equipped the person is for leadership.
On the flipside, there is little downside in being a peacemaker and helping yourself or other parties reach an agreement on a matter. Being the “bigger person†is most often shown as a sign of maturity, and only if mishandled shows the person to be “weakâ€. Basically, being the peacemaker is a low risk/high reward activity.
Helping Yourself – When facing conflicts that concern yourself or your own operation this may require compromise, but not always. More often you only need to communicate better and understand motivations and constraints with each person’s operation. Usually there is a win-win scenario that just hadn’t been brought to light yet because it was hidden behind misunderstandings. The key to helping yourself is a famous Stephen Covey principle: “Seek to understand, not to be understoodâ€. Once you have listened to the other party, build upon what you heard to see if there are mutually acceptable solutions. Notice I didn’t mention explaining your position yet again. Seeking solutions, understanding, and compromise are hallmarks of great leadership.
Helping Others – When jumping in the middle of other parties’ conflict, or being asked to mediate, you’re looked upon as being helpful, as a resource, as an innovator. Again, the issue is almost always centered on miscommunication and misunderstandingIn this case have both parties explain thing to you individually, then see if you can work them towards a solution. You will be SHOCKED at how many times the win-win solution is completely evident, but was hidden to the participants.
As I said, being the peacemaker will rarely get you in any kind of trouble. In fact, it often highlights your readiness for more responsibility in the organization. The key is communication and seeking the win-win solutions that are almost always out there to be had.
---------------------------------------------------------
If you liked this post you’ll love my book The Manager’s Diary: Thinking Outside the Cubicle. It’s filled with quick and actionable advice on a broad range of topics that speak to today’s leaders. Give it a look in hard copy or Kindle!
For daily posts and material from Cameron, please check out his Twitter feed @managersdiary, his Facebook Page, or his blog The Manager’s Diary.
Communications Manager at Nzoia Sugar Company
10 å¹´TRUE
Operations Director | Director Total Facilities Management | Independent Consultant | Programme Management l Training & Development | Health & Safety | Quality Assurance
10 å¹´To attempt to answer these in order, as posted not importance, each has a valid point and deserves an answer. Simon Bojovic Standing your ground, can be seen as being obtrusive, or obstructive, How about the approach of, I/we understand where you are coming from, but we feel you may not have been provided with all of the information on the cause and effects, can we please discuss these so we are all aware, of the intentions and reasons. They are then in your area of influence. Christel Helem, from what you have said you are not picking a fight, you are acting as the ambassador/representative/spokes person for a group of like minded individuals, can I suggest the advise of above as with Simon. The skill is to turn the situation to your advantage, disarm the situation and then use your powers of negotiation to bring about resolution that can work without after shocks which lead to even more disagreement. But above all record your evidence, because as sure as eggs are eggs, you will need the proof when the court of inquiry starts.
Independent Consulting Mgmt / Industry / Govt Consulting Areas / Keane NTTDATA/ FM Global
10 å¹´Disagree with out being disagreeable is the ultimate answer for this kind of situation and question(s), even then sometimes the upper hand $$$$ bills stands ( not necessarily to reason)
Career Highlights: Manager/VP of Marketing * Individual Contributor in Business Development & Marcomm * Excellent References * High Productivity & Business Value
10 å¹´@Chris, good points--especially if some are smart and brave enough to risk being perceived as "negative" by sharing potential problems that need to be addressed (the W or T in SWOT). I've seen this where marketing partners describe user-perspective issues with IT recommendations, but perhaps are overruled by the finance/IT budgeting. e.g."It's such a concern for daily usability without this functionality, that they say 'you're buying the free version'." It wasn't debated further because the top positions in IT/Finance held their view. After becoming aware, the President/COO has the final say to invite further debate until all views are aligned or go with the IT/Finance partnered view.