What Does Conflict Have To Do With Organization Learning And Development?

Imagine standing on the shore of a pond or a lake. One cannot resist picking up a rock and throwing it in or skipping it. What happens to the water? No matter how small an object you throw into the water, it creates a ripple, a disturbance, and displacement. Now, think about the pond in a psychological, sociological, and biological sense and the pebble or rock as information, stimulus, interaction, etc. The rock represents something new introduced into the human brain, the situation, the relationship, etc. The rock disturbs the status quo and creates disequilibrium throughout. Yes, one might think the farther from the rock's entrance into the pond, the less the disturbance is felt, but, none-the-less, its entrance disturbs the whole in some way and the pond/lake is no longer the same. Consider many rocks being thrown into the pond, and one can see how change can be constant, turbulent, and interactive. Also, note that the time needed for the pond to return to calm increases as the number of rocks increases.

The rock entering the pond is a visual illustration of displacement theory. Whether it is the brain or an organization, the input (being a new experience, information, etc) will require the organism to respond to this new element in order to return to an equilibrium state (what one might consider to be "normal"). In the brain, the organism will either replace old information, ideas, beliefs, values, etc with the new, graft the new onto the old and reconfigure or restructure their understanding and perception, or, considering it irrelevant, shunts it to the sub-conscious until the new input is relevant and later can be resolved. This constitutes a repository of unresolved conflicts. When applying this to an organization, the analogy is equally applicable. For example, an organization who hires a new person will need to make adjustments to that new person. That person will bring new experiences, ideas, perspectives, patterns of behavior and interaction, and other cultural elements into the organization. Other employees will need to make adjustments and make a "place" for that person. This is assuming that the organization is not Behavior/Belief Restriction and Control or Behavior/Belief Compliant. On the whole, the new person impacts the culture and the identity of the organization in a small way and the organization changes. Of course, like individuals who create a repository of unresolved conflicts, organizations, whose members do not address differences or do not accept other co-workers can create a repository of unresolved issues that will eventually result in "stress fractures" and "fault-lines" waiting for the "last straw" or a critical event to bring them to the surface.

The idea of new input creating disequilibrium is the introduction of understanding conflict as the central element of all learning, development, growth, and change. When new information is introduced into the brain, the human brain experiences a conflict event. What will it do with the new experience/information? For example, the ultimate conflict event is birth. The infant emerges into the world and is bombarded with sensory input. The infant scrambles to resolve the conflict. For the first time, the infant experiences the need for air, temperature changes, sounds, smells, touch, sense of abandonment, fear as the world continues to intrude on its existence. To resolve these multiple conflicts, the infant seeks safety through creating a relational bond (imprinting, suckling on the mother for food, being held, and hearing the mother's familiar voice). Although this initial bonding will create equilibrium, the respite is short-lived. The infant will continue to be faced with conflicts throughout its life as it learns, interacts with others, experiences sickness, countless failures, loss, and traumas. In other words, conflict is a normal biological element that is hard-wired into human learning, growth, and development that begins with birth and continues throughout one's life. In a way, the process mimics Lewin's organizational change cycle of freeze, unfreeze, freeze. Instead, the process is equilibrium, disequilibrium, equilibrium. Using this analogy, conflict can be seen as an essential variable in organization development.

Approaches to Conflict

If conflict is the catalyst then, What will one do with the experiences of conflict? How will one respond? A starting point will be to use an adaptation of Thomas/Kilmann's conflict styles. There are five modes: Conflict avoidance, competing, accommodating, compromising, and collaborating. Let us look at each and how they apply to the organization. As you will see, all approaches have a place, but not all of them are healthy approaches to conflict.

Conflict Avoidance is a tool used to attempt to ignore events, information, or input. In essence, the person is saying "I don't want to hear it, look at it, see it, acknowledge it." Behaviors one might see are: passive aggressive behavior, removal of one's self from the situation, creating distractions (blaming, "whataboutism," projecting), and revising history. Such organizations are closed systems where belief and relational structures are put in place to ignore or protect against the impact of the environment. An example is an organization that seeks out employees that "fit." It minimizes the impact of others on the status quo and the organization does not have to spend time or money to convert employees. Such fit also avoids the conflict that would come through diversity.

The positive aspect of conflict avoidance? If the conflict cannot be resolved, then it can be shunted to a later time when energy can be spent on the conflict or to the detachment stage of transformation whereby creative energy can be unconsciously unleashed to generate solutions. This is not true avoidance when addressed in this manner but avoidance with a purpose.

Competing, also known as Distributive is another resistance tool. Information is rejected right away. The underlying response is, "I am right and you are wrong." This style reflects a person who has competing wants, needs, beliefs, views, etc, and is not open to receiving new information from anyone. One is closed-minded, has blinder's on, and is coercive in their relationships.

This conflict mode is devastating in organizations when practiced by leadership. As with the coercive leadership style, the organization may exhibit regular turnover, employee burnout, demoralization, inflexibility, and stagnation. This organization will likely be Behavior/Belief Restriction and Control. Why would an organization choose this mode? Power and control over culture provides stability, comfort, and certainty.

Competing has its place. When an organization is "stuck" and cannot make decisions collectively, or when decisions are needed to be made quickly to turn the organization toward a new direction, leadership may resort to a distributive approach to direct the organization. However, such a mode must be used sparingly or else it will negatively impact culture.

Accommodating is a conflict mode that is common. It is the "yes man/woman" who will simply comply with whatever is suggested to avoid conflict. In essence, it is outward compliance without inward permission. In other words, the person will do whatever is wanted for various reasons (i.e., Leader/Member Exchange, Social Exchange, and/or because of punishment, reward, and relational power and control factors associated with compliance), but will not actually be committed. This has implications for change management because accommodating persons in an organization will not really change but will appear to change. Without inward commitment, compliance will dissipate when control factors are removed or lose their power.

Accommodating is not a bad mode during certain situations. Accommodating is a useful tool for heading off potential conflict that may arise later.  Be careful. The conflict may dissipate over time because of lack of energy, but it may demand attention with greater force later. Sometimes accommodating other's needs are the best way to care about the needs of the organization and leaders. Accommodation can be a form of self-giving and servanthood. However, accommodation should not be a regular practice because the lack of diverse input and participation will stunt the organization's (and the person's) growth and development. Employees may feel taken advantage of, neglected, and disrespected.

Compromising is a mode where everyone wins a little and loses a little. Often, it is characterized by bargaining. Parties negotiate (as opposed to competing) for what is most important while willing to relinquish what is of least importance. Going back to our illustration, learning is negotiated with other wants or needs (i.e., If you do your homework, then you can.... If you eat your vegetables, then you can have desert.). Although there is communication (which makes this better than the first three modes), there tends to be "winners" and "losers." In organizations where power inequality exists, compromising tends to be an unequal exchange and slide into accommodation. Therefore, compromising may best work in team subcultures where power and responsibility tend to be equally shared.

Compromising is best used when there does not seem to be a solution where everybody will be happy, but is most suitable to all parties involved. Everybody understands that the team/organization is more important than any individual’s need and is willing to compromise. Empathy is important when using this style, for if the leader shares with the employee the difficulty in the decision, and that there is not much of a clear choice, then everyone is more willing to compromise.

Collaborating is the most effective means of managing conflict. Conflict is mutually embraced and both join together to problem-solve. Commitment is high. Power is equally shared through empowerment, relinquishment, or organization design so all are included in the process of finding solutions to further the overall goals and mission of the team/organization. Empathy, compassion, and unconditional love play a role in collaboration. Flexibility is high. All are willing to change beliefs, values, behaviors, perceptions, and relational dynamics based on new information, experiences, or input. In essence, conflict is easily embraced for its possibilities for growth, development, and relational benefits. Change comes easily and, idealistically, the organization/team is willing to stay with the conflict until a conclusion rather than seeking a quick resolution through a short-cut (This is common because components of conflict are stress, struggling, and uncertainty.).

 In a collaborative approach, leadership involves the employee in their own development and change as a way to help the manager give the employee what the manager and the employee both want. This may be a way for the manager and employee to engage in a development plan to achieve specific goals. Everyone is brought together to help achieve goals/interests/needs? 

All conflict management modes are appropriate for particular situations and contexts. It may not be possible to collaborate (though working toward this may be a good goal). Sometimes, one needs to protect one's self in the face of leaders/followers that uses dysfunctional conflict modes. For example, a leader that regularly uses the competing mode may not respond to an attempt to shift to compromising or collaboration. Therefore, one may have to choose to accommodate or avoid conflict.

Why is understanding conflict helpful? There are several possible benefits. First, conflict becomes normal and a benefit. Instead of being afraid of conflict, members of the organization embraces it as a normal and essential part of learning, growth, and development. Second, the organization looks at how it manages conflict on all levels. This will result in leadership and staff training and development and intentionally shaping the culture to respond to conflict in constructive ways. Third, the organization begins to understand resistance, whether it be competing, accommodating, avoidance, or compromising, and explore the social, structural, power and control issues which support the resistance. Fourth, understanding conflict also involves understanding the organization's various communication systems and content. Often, conflict is caused by communication that lacks transparency and is veiled in secrecy or hierarchical power and control. Finally, it will help an organization facilitate and work through a change process.

Conclusion. Conflict is integrated into our human psychology and social learning and development through experiences and other types of input. The new information is processed through displacement (new ideas, understandings, beliefs, values, perceptions, relational systems, etc replace old), the assimilation of new information that adds to old information, and the creativity of new pathways across the neural net, and the contribution of the development of the self and its world toward self-actualization.

However, learning, growth, and development can be hindered through conflict responses that are resistant to input/experiences. This can be due to imbedded social or organizational systems, fear of losing power and control, and being impatient in the face of the stress, uncertainty, and the struggle needed to stay with the conflict. These are barriers to change which conflict often illuminates. Yet, they also show how being open to conflict can expose vistas of possibilities for what our human, social, and economic systems can become. As you look at your own personal and organizational conflict responses, let us hope that our courage and our love will be greater than our fear.

References:

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2013). Primal leadership: Unleashing the power of emotional intelligence.Harvard Business Press.

Hicks, T. (2018). Embodied Conflict: The Neural Basis of Conflict and Communication. Routledge.

Hicks, T. (2019). Conflict resolution is a change process, but what is changing?: The neural reality of conflict experience. Retrieved from https://www.mediate.com/articles/hicks-conflict-resolution.cfm

Loder, J. E. (1989). The transforming moment. Helmers & Howard Pub.

Mayer, B. S. (2009). Staying with conflict: A strategic approach to ongoing disputes. John Wiley & Sons.

Raines, S. S. (2013). Conflict Management for Managers: Resolving Workplace, Client, and Policy Disputes. Jossey-Bass.