Conflict - taking a look at the ACAS report

According to the latest ACAS report on Workplace Conflict 'the cost of workplace conflict to UK organisations is in the region of ￡28.5 billon, which is the equivalent of more than ￡1,000 for each employee'. Wow this is a headline that grabs your attention! Whilst I recognise that dysfunctional conflict does cost and can impact organisations, I have a few thoughts on the report that I wanted to share.

Is Conflict a bad thing?

Due to the nature of the report it naturally focusses on the detriment of conflict. ACAS does provide a small mention within the report about the importance of conflict within the workplace, however I think the emphasis they place on conflict as a problem. It's potentially misleading, unhelpful and fear inducing. In my view, greater distinction needs to be made of the difference between functional and dysfunctional conflict.

Functional Conflict

In organisations, especially innovation organisations, conflict is good and very much needed! It avoids group-think, it generates a space for diversity of thought, it's energising and exciting debating the different angels of a situation/product/service. It leads to better problem solving and decision making, it's more engaging and inclusive. Conflict stretches our thinking, it helps us to learn and unlearn. It challenges the assumptions and values we hold and lifts the veil on deeply held thoughts and views, so we can evolve, grow and be better people. We need to inject more conflict into our lives, but we need to be more open to it and get better at it!

Dysfunctional Conflict

What is not good is when conflict becomes dysfunctional. When things get personal, challenges are intended to wound not help evolution, where blame is placed, when it's exclusive and people are domineering in their approach, when it doesn't feel safe to raise a different viewpoint, admit to a mistake or ask for help. This is when conflict becomes dysfunctional and it needs to be addressed otherwise it will have an impact (I use this term going forward to make the clear distinction).

Self Responsibility - adults in the workplace

I read with interest that according to the research 1 in 5 people take no action in response to dysfunctional conflict. ACAS suggest that when dysfunctional conflict arises it can often be informally resolved through discussion with the manager. I agree, to some extent, if you have an issue with your manager that you need to resolve. What I found from reading the report is that it seemed to be silent on self-responsibility and the outcomes that may be achieved through people resolving their conflict with the person(s) they are in conflict with. As adults we all have agency and the ability to take responsibility and ownership of our relationships and the challenges we face. I believe providing people with the skills to have these types of conversations and creating the environment where it's safe to do so, has a huge impact. I feel this is even more important to consider, as we move to flatter, networked or self-managed organisations. It will be vital for people to have the skills and ability to discuss issues they have experienced directly with people to bring them to a resolution.

Is dysfunctional conflict always 1 on 1?

The report appears to focus on dysfunctional conflict that is between two people. In my view, the report doesn't pay sufficient attention to team/group conflict. We work within systems, which involve groups of people and typically no one individual sets out to cause an issue or a problem. Typically, it's the wider systems and teams that contribute to how situations play out that lead to how people behave. I believe in creating teams that have the ability to discuss and resolve dysfunctional conflict together. This enables all of the parts that are contributing to the system of work, and the potential dysfunctional conflict, the ability to change, learn and adapt to ensure smoother working going forward. I feel this is becoming increasingly important as we work more collaboratively and in teams-based environments.

Use of formal procedures

The report is very clear that informal resolution of dysfunctional conflict is encouraged and a very effective way of resolving conflict. As you would expect, it also highlights the use of formal processes which ACAS suggest provide an important framework for resolving conflict. Furthermore, ACAS suggests that where issues proceed formally to disciplinary the focus should be learning and avoid blame, with the purpose of such a process to improve behaviour rather than punish.

I really struggle with this.

It seems to lack an understanding of people, how we learn and how we react to situations - here's why...

Firstly, discourse is important to us. Language is how we make sense of the world and process what is happening to us, so we can respond accordingly. Being involved in something called a 'disciplinary' has punitive connotations of blame and punishment.

Secondly, from my experience, whilst the outcome of disciplinary procedures try to include recommendations for improvement, they typically also included a 'warning' of some sort which further embeds the notion of punishment and blame.

Thirdly, the framework within the ACAS code and disciplinary policies is unlikely to be conducive to a learning conversation. Investigations have taken place, evidence packs are submitted, people may have been suspended and the meeting is very procedural, the narrative is reminiscent of law enforcement.

In my view, these factors combine to trigger a threat response in people. In these types of processes/meetings people are in survival mode, you'll recognise the threat responses of fight/flight/freeze. When this part of the psyche is enacted it's not conducive to a learning experience... at all. To an extent ACAS acknowledge this in the report findings, citing that where dysfunctional conflict resulted in formal processes, the cost was more than 3 times those associated with informal resolution.

Mediation

I felt slightly disappointed. In my view, the report lacked real championing or encouragement of the use of mediation. What interested me was the finding that only 5% of those experiencing dysfunctional conflict took part in mediation, with 74% of those who underwent mediation found their conflict had been fully or largely resolved. Which is great, amazing, super news! This finding suggests there is a process out there that can help with providing meaningful resolution but there is a lack of understanding or provision within organisations for people to use this mechanism. This is really helpful - it's something HR teams can use to influence their organisations to say, look we need budget provision for this because not only will it save us money in the long run, it will more than likely bring about effective resolution.

So What... quick thoughts on what you can do

Mediation - I feel (and the report backs this view) that this is a great way to bring dysfunctional conflict to resolution. In my experience, I don't feel it works having HR as the mediators, as lovely as we are, HR in the room creates a formality/escalation in itself that I'm not sure is overly helpful in people then feeling able to speak freely.

Feedback - providing people with the tools and skills to have effective conversations with one another to talk through instances and issues that arise.

Coaching - creating an environment of curiosity, asking open questions and looking at things from different viewpoints, so that challenge or questioning of an idea or thought doesn't feel unnatural or confrontational.

Facilitation - great facilitation of a debate or functional conflict conversation can really help with nipping in the bud inappropriate behaviours that may get triggered. Use a team 'check in' at the start of meetings so people are aware if colleagues are distracted or have something on their mind. Use a team 'check out' to get a sense of how people are feeling after the gathering so any issues can be talked through then and there and not left to fester. A great action learning technique is to do a 'check in' during the meeting - How well are we working as a team? What do we want to do differently for the remainder of the time?

Concluding thought...

Overall I was a bit sad there was a lack of seeking to change the policy/law around disciplinary and grievances, but that is likely to be my personal bias/views creeping in and shading how I've viewed the report!

If you want to have a read of the report, it can be access on the ACAS website or here:

Estimating the Costs of Workplace Conflict - https://www.acas.org.uk/estimating-the-costs-of-workplace-conflict-report