What are the sources of conflict in the team?
The team leader should be able to communicate, manage time, integrate the group and deal with conflicts arising in it. This ability is extremely important, all the more so because coping does not always mean nipping conflict in the bud. Sometimes healthy competition in a group can be more driving than harmonious and stable cooperation, sometimes conflict in a team can become destructive.
It seems that it is well known where conflicts in the team come from. Someone disagrees with someone else, has a different opinion on a given topic – and a misunderstanding is ready. This is indeed the case, but it is worth noting that there may be many reasons for such a difference of opinion.
The currently most popular classification of the sources of conflicts was created by two psychologists dealing with this topic – Stanisław Chełpa and Tomasz Witkowski. According to their theory, six basic causes of conflict can be distinguished.
First of all, the lack or improper communication is to blame for misunderstandings. By collaborating on multiple tasks, it’s very easy to do something in spite of someone else, harm them, or otherwise step on their toes – even involuntarily. If there is no dialogue between colleagues, which is the easiest way to resolve disagreements, there is a high probability that the conflict will escalate.
Erroneous communication occurs when there is a confrontation, but it is so badly played that it cannot lead to a constructive solution. The basic dirty play is generalizing and building messages like you. This can be seen very often in arguments, when instead of giving reliable arguments, the parties throw accusations such as „you are always late”, „you never do anything”, etc. Such an accusation is unlikely to be refuted without using a similar trick, moreover – it is impossible to argue with it rationally. Therefore, it is worth remembering that in the case of disagreement, the best messages are always like Me – „I have delays when you are late with the project”, „I feel that it is unfair when I work and you use social networks”. The words „never” and „always” should also be banned – if we have something to reproach someone, it must be concrete.
The second causeof conflict in a team is culture. However, it is not about having a personal culture, or rather lack of it, but about cultural differences that can affect cooperation in a group. An example may be the problems that arise when representatives of mono- and polychronic cultures confront each other in a team. Monochronistics are those who work in accordance with time – according to a schedule, calendar and watch. They are punctual and do not like being late – the best example of such a culture are our neighbors, Germany. Polychronics are those for whom time does not matter much – they are flexible, constantly in short time, work according to their own rhythm, not worrying about schedules. Here it is easiest to imagine representatives of Mediterranean cultures, like Italians. When representatives of such groups meet in one team, it is usually difficult to match the style of work of one to the other. In this case, if the leader does not act, and representatives of both groups are not willing to show understanding, resolving the conflict can become extremely problematic.
As can be seen, in modern cultures only young children behave completely naturally. The older a person gets, the more masks he wears and the more roles he plays. The basic roles played by man are dealt with by the department of psychology – transactional analysis. According to it, there are three roles that each of us can take. The first is the child, that is, striving for what you currently want, regardless of the consequences and punishments. The second is the parent, i.e. the role that is a kind of critic. By playing it, a person tries to be the best, most ideal version of himself – standing over himself like a strict parent. And finally, the role of an adult – the most rational, based on facts and real events, not taking into account emotions. When two people meet and each of them has a different role, it is very easy to conflict. Especially since entering into such roles is not conscious.
The next source of conflicts in the team has already been mentioned in the context of external factors that affect the group’s performance. It is about needs that are met in a variety of ways. When it comes to cooperation in a team, conflict in the team will arise primarily due to the mismatch between the amount of resources and the needs of employees. It is not always possible to supply the team in such a way that everyone gets exactly as much as they need. In addition, unmet needs may concern, for example, security – in a situation where there is a fear of redundancies. Then workers, not being sure of the stability of their position, can start competing unhealthily to maintain employment.
Other sources of conflicts, according to Tomaszewski and Chełpa, are self-esteem and personality – they are therefore located in the team members themselves. When it comes to the team, there should not be such a conflict in the team among professionals, as they result directly from people’s opinions about themselves, their approach to themselves – that is, from what should not be discussed at work. It is the manager’s responsibility to ensure that such factors do not generate conflicts in the first place, as the workplace is not a support group and a leader is not a therapist. To sum up, a team of co-workers is not a group that should deal with solving personality problems of individual employees.
Once we know the sources of conflicts in the team, it will be easier to eliminate the formation of misunderstandings. Therefore, you can distribute tasks in advance so that people from different cultures get a corresponding job, you can take care of a better allocation of resources, etc. However, what if despite these efforts, disputes arise anyway? In this case, it is worth knowing the methods of dealing with conflicts.
According to the most popular theories, there are five strategies for resolving conflicts in a team. Each of them has a specific intensity in terms of two dimensions – readiness to cooperate and taking into account the interests of other parties to the conflict and determination to achieve the goal.
And so the groups most determined to achieve theirs will tend either to compete or to cooperate. The difference is that the rivals will not care about others also achieving their goals – they will only strive to stand out and achieve success. Collaborators, on the other hand, believe that the resolution of conflict in a team occurs when everyone achieves what they have been striving for.
Groups or individuals who are undetermined to achieve a goal adopt an attitude of avoidance or conformity in the face of conflict. A group that does not care about cooperation with others will try to avoid the topic, thus preventing anyone, including themselves, from achieving the goal. The adapting group, on the other hand, will align itself with the goals of others without blocking their achievement and without going against their assumption.
Compromise is a specific approach to conflicts in a team. It ranks in the middle of both scales, assuming that the best solution is to achieve a little of the goal of each of the conflicting parties. Thus, no one achieves the plan, but no one is left empty-handed either.
What is the role of the leader in these strategies? First of all, it is necessary to observe what strategies employees decide on. The best solution is always cooperation, which – if only it is effective – allows you to achieve all your goals. The least effective are the avoidant and competitive. The first block the implementation of not only their own, but actually every idea, as a result of which they do not solve the conflict in any way, but only moving it away from themselves. Rivals can often win – especially if their opponents are matchmakers. Thus, only one goal can be achieved, which looking through the prism of the effectiveness of the entire group means a rather poor solution. Compromise is sometimes a good solution if, for example, in the future it will be possible to further develop projects or the performance of tasks only partially guarantees success. Most often, however, this solution – although it seems fair – is insufficient.
Thus, it is the responsibility of the leader to choose the right strategy for fighting the conflict and strive to ensure that as often as possible – as far as possible – it is cooperation. The leader should also carefully monitor the state of his team and support those who cannot independently break through with their own goals and proposals.
You already know how to solve a conflict in a team, how to look for its sources and eliminate them. But is it always necessary? Although conflict in a team is not usually associated with something good, but rather arouses negative emotions, in practice it turns out that this is not only a destructive phenomenon.
Remember the beginning of a relationship – partnership, friendly, employee. At the beginning everything was going great – the relationship was intensively built, you found more and more common features, the cooperation was better. However, after some time, something began to grind – there were misunderstandings, disagreements and different opinions.
Such a development of relationships is natural – initially not knowing the other person, we show ourselves from the best side, sometimes we give way, sometimes we will not say something. We are looking for confirmation that we fit together, that it will be a special relationship, long-term friendship or effective cooperation. Meanwhile, each person is different from others – and that is why there are differences of opinion or different goals. When they come to light, conflicts often arise. Is this wrong? In a healthy, well-managed relationship, no. If you’re a good leader, signs of conflict in your team will help you recognize the problem and solve it before it grows to sky-high proportions. Imagine, however, that your employees, despite their disagreements, sit like a troupe, suffocating anger, frustration and dissatisfaction. The atmosphere in the team will deteriorate and the effectiveness of employees will decrease. Thus, it will turn out that the lack of open, open conflict in the team will be a much worse solution.
Conflict in a team is therefore an excellent tool for development. Of course, you can never let it go „on its own” – then it can escalate and a regular war will develop on the basis of the team. Properly directed and used – using the chosen strategy – the conflict can result in even better results and an even more harmonious team.
Projekt otrzymał dofinansowanie z Norwegii poprzez Fundusze Norweskie 2014-2021, w ramach programu „Dialog społeczny – godna praca”.
