6 Signs that You're Avoiding Conflict

The definition of leadership is influence. The challenge of leadership is conflict. The result of leadership is change.

The problem is that conflict avoidance is more of a natural tendency in most people than it is to power forward when friction is high.

One key to not avoiding conflict is to be aware of your patterns when you're evading it. We do this instinctively and subconsciously, which means that self-awareness is the primary tool to escape the need to be comfortable.

Comfort is the enemy of growth. Leaders who want influence are consistently reminding that they must overcome conflict to produce changes and improvements in themselves and the people and organizations they seek to serve.

The following 6 signs are meant to help leaders recognize when they're avoiding conflict to assess whether or not they're also preventing progress and, therefore, thwarting greater results in the future.

1. Reversing a Decision

If you've recently reversed a decision that you made, it's time to reflect on what you're avoiding. It could be that you're preventing a real disaster, and luckily you're vulnerable enough to say "I was wrong about that." But, most business decisions that get reversed are due to fear that we're going to upset one group or another.

One clear signal that your decision reversal was based on conflict avoidance is if you're pulling back on a decision that would be good for the organization but the employees were unhappy at the outset of the new policy or practice. Beyond conflict, people don't like change. If your decision was reversed quickly to avoid employee morale issues, it could be that you just didn't let the new process play out long enough for the dissenters to quiet down. Some decisions will inevitably have to be reversed, but if you're doing it all the time or for the wrong reasons, you're just avoiding the conflict that's necessary to see change.

2. Extending the Timeline of a Project

Some project timelines are unreasonable from day-one. If that's a recurring problem in your organization, you have an different issue. If the timeline of your project was feasible, and you pushed implementation back anyway, it could be that you're avoiding conflict. Extending the timeframe might seem like the right thing to quell angst, but in reality it only frustrates people.

Slowing down a project or even putting a stop to it--like those perennial projects that seem to start-and-stop with no real aim--demonstrates weak leadership. In the end, the people who want the project to proceed are upset, and the people who wanted the project to slow down have a new understanding of how they can get their way regardless of who appears to be in charge. If you've extended a timeline for the wrong reasons, you're just avoiding conflict.

3. Bringing More People to the Table

Small groups are good at creating; large groups are good at critiquing. When the group of decision-makers gets too large, you're never going to get a decision. If you feel pressured to add more people to a work group, and you give into that pressure, that's the conflict that you're avoiding. It's often important to protect groups from outside influence and to protect the group leaders from having to manage so many voices whereby discussion, ideation, and debate prevent action.

Remember, giving people a voice, doesn't mean that we have to give them a say. Listening to people doesn't mean that we have to do what they tell us. There's a huge distinction. Strong leaders are good listeners, but they're also clear with people that they're not able to execute on everything they hear. If you're bringing more people, or the wrong people, to the table, you're just avoiding a decision that might not please everyone.

4. Allowing Dissension on the Team

Disagreements and misunderstandings happen. It's also important for team members to feel comfortable when they want to object. But, when the leader allows dissension to occur without squashing it or working it out, everyone suffers. Especially if there are any bad behaviors that create strong negative emotions or fracture the group into "sides" on a issue, the dissension is creating barriers.

A clear signal that there's dissension is when certain members of the team are quiet. When people no longer feel like they can share their thoughts, the team is splintered and frustrated. And, their feelings will ultimately be directed at the leader who couldn't galvanize everyone after a heavy discussion. If you're allowing for dissension on your team, you're avoiding conflict and your responsibility as a leader.

5. Blurring the Lines Between Friend and Foe

Not everyone has to be designated as a "friend" or "foe," but the larger and more political the organization, the more opportunities there are for internal and external supporters and opponents. When you blur those lines by "keeping your enemies" closer than your friends, you're sending the wrong signal to your actual champions.

In other words, if you're literally shaking hands with, doing favors for, or breaking bread with people who have clearly demonstrated that they're an enemy of the cause, you're avoiding the conflict associated with challenging (and sometimes shunning) your adversaries. When these fake relationships are public, you're communicating weakness as a leader.

6. Preventing Accountability Measures

One of the most difficult aspects of leadership is holding yourself and others accountable. The problem is that your best people hold themselves accountable without management, and your worst people will get away with whatever standard you allow them to create on their own. Having a standard of acceptance and a standard of excellence, and pushing people to stay above the bar and reach higher is the true calling of a leader.

If you have members of the team who are underperforming or simply incompetent, and you're not doing anything about it, you're avoiding the conflict that necessary for improved results. Worse yet, if your direct reports have direct reports, and you're not letting them hold their people accountable, you're messaging to the whole organization that you don't care about outcomes.

The Fear of Conflict

Not all conflict should be seen as unhealthy. Lots of conflict leads to stronger relationships, better bonds, tighter trust, and faster advances. The conflict that ruins culture is always based on a leaders fear of facing conflict, and without it, you can't make change. That's precisely why organizations fail--the leader is unwilling to challenge the status quo because any deviation from current conditions is a change. Influencing change is what all great leaders do and what every poor leader is afraid of.