Two methods to resolve a conflict in a team
Identifying recurring triggers and addressing them
“We don’t have conflicts in our team.” Really? A team with no conflicts is one where freedom of thought and action is suppressed.
Differences are a natural outcome of interaction among individuals who work together on tasks that require cooperation. People think differently, have diverse perspectives and experiences, and follow distinct work and behavior norms—this inevitably influences teamwork. The goal isn’t to avoid conflict but to let it surface so that the team learns how to manage it effectively over time.
Types of conflicts
Since many types of conflicts can arise in an organization, it is helpful to group them into three main categories for diagnosis and resolution:
- Relationship conflicts:
These occur when someone does something others dislike or unexpected, breaking team norms and triggering strong, unpleasant emotions. - Information conflicts:
These arise from insufficient information to make sound decisions, misinformation, or differing interpretations of the same issue, even when the existence of the problem is agreed upon. - Interest conflicts:
These happen when one or more parties feel that another’s needs interfere with fulfilling their own.
Conflicts of Interrelationships and Interests can be conflicts of Values where disputes between groups or individuals arise because of differences in the importance given to basic values. Conflict arising from the collision of values is the most difficult conflict to resolve considering that values are unlikely to change over time.
Interrelationship and Interest conflicts can be Multiple role conflicts. This kind of conflict arises when a person belongs to different groups by affinity or task performed and is under pressure to choose and ally with one side or the other in a dispute.
And finally, Interrelationship and Interest conflicts can also be conflicts arising from Resource scarcity. These arise when the demands of managers and work groups are greater than the amount of resources available.
Approaches to conflict resolution
Depending on our character and the culture of the organisation to which we belong, there are basically 4 ways of dealing with conflict:
– Avoidance: when team members think and/or say phrases like: ‘We get along, we don’t interact that much, but we get along’. Team members choose not to get involved in the cause of the problem and the conflict is hidden. People don’t know there is a conflict, so it is impossible to deal with it.
– Adapt: when team members think and/or say phrases like: ‘I always end up taking meetings where I don’t play a role, doing favours without being acknowledged’. In this case team members put each other’s needs above their own needs, people do not really show what they need and this will potentially lead to conflict again.
– Competing: when team members think and/or say phrases such as: ‘I usually have the last word, in the end things are done my way or no way at all, that’s the way it is! In this case, members choose to satisfy their own needs by asserting them or by opposing others, so that one person forces others to do things his or her way.
– Collaborate: when team members think and/or say phrases such as: ‘We have different opinions and characters but I am getting to know them and am surprised at the agreements we have reached’. In this case the members regularly spend time in an assertive dialogue looking for solutions that satisfy everyone.
Collaboration is the only long-term strategy for resolving conflicts. Teams that align early on with a shared purpose, vision, and clear collaboration rules reduce the likelihood of unnecessary conflicts. It’s also beneficial to establish conflict-resolution strategies proactively before tensions arise.
A team should, from the outset, agree on how to handle conflicts and develop resolution strategies even before any issues arise, as conflicts are much more likely to occur when time is running out, deadlines are approaching, or work pressure increases.
The conflict circle
There are several models for resolving conflicts within organizations. One of the most widely used is the model originally developed by Christopher Moore at CDR Associates of Boulder. This conflict map aims to categorize the underlying causes of conflict, offering insight into the factors that create or fuel it. According to this model, the six main triggers of conflict are values, relationships, external causes or emotional states, structure, information, and interests.
- Conflicts of values
When there is a values conflict, it means that the different values of team members clash, causing or exacerbating a conflict. These differing values can be related to life (such as religious, ethical, or moral beliefs) as well as everyday workplace values (such as punctuality, customer service, transparency, loyalty to the company, etc.).
These conflicts are often highly heated because beliefs are deeply important and ingrained in individuals. Moreover, changing a belief requires a significant amount of time and, in many cases, the involvement of an external mediator.
- Relationship conflicts
A relationship conflict originates from specific negative experiences in the past. Relationship issues often lead to the creation of stereotypes, causing people to restrict or cut off communication with the other party. One party perceives unfair treatment and retaliates against the other, which the other party perceives as provocation, leading them to retaliate in another way, resulting in further retaliation and an endless conflict.
For example, if the sales department delivers the necessary information for the editorial department to create an online offer with a slight delay beyond the agreed deadline, and if this happens repeatedly, over time, the editorial department may develop an image of the entire sales team as selfish and disrespectful of other departments’ needs. This perception then becomes personalized, leading them to label each member as “selfish and abusive.”
This negative experience could result in a situation where, one day, the editorial department becomes aware of useful commercial information that could benefit the sales department but chooses not to share it as a form of retaliation, justifying it with a simple “I don’t have time.”
- External causes or emotional states
Conflicts caused by external factors or emotional states arise when external pressures contribute to or worsen a situation. These could include someone having a bad day, experiencing chronic illness, or going through a divorce. Broader factors like economic recessions or global crises (e.g., COVID-19) can also fuel such conflicts.
- Conflicts of data
Data conflicts occur when parties are working with incorrect or incomplete information or when one party possesses critical information that the other lacks. Additionally, even when the same data is shared, differing interpretations can lead to conflict. Although facts seem objective, they require interpretation, which can result in significantly different perspectives.
- Structural conflicts
Structural conflicts include those caused by limited resources, authority issues and organisational structure.
Limited resources – In a free market economy companies compete and resources such as money, time and people are often limited. This situation can cause structural conflict. Collaboration between two companies, to respond to resource scarcity, is not an option because it would violate antitrust laws. For example, laptops or an iPhone are expensive and limited resources that can be allocated to only a few employees in some companies. When one group of employees has access to such resources while others do not, conflicts may arise among employees or between employees and management. While technicians may feel that these devices are crucial to their productivity, those in the sales department may point out that these devices are important for them to make a good impression on customers.
Lack of authority – Authority problems result when people try to solve a problem but do not have the authority to make the necessary decisions. Authority can come from formal position on the organisational chart, reputation in the organisation, and consistently high level of performance over time. Lack of authority frequently contributes to the frustration and anger felt by the parties and often leads to further aggravation of the problem.
Organisational structure – In these types of conflicts different departments or individuals have to work together but have divergent priorities for their respective jobs. The sales department, for example, aims to maximise the number of online sales of certain services even if it has to promise things that the company cannot always guarantee; on the other hand, the editorial and production department has to put together an attractive, coherent and detailed online offer that corresponds precisely to reality even if this means delaying the publication of the online offer. Each department has different priorities and this can lead to structural conflict within the company.
This model, as well as offering a diagnosis by providing categories to understand the dynamics, is based on the idea that it is necessary to help the parties to the conflict to stay focused below the line as this is the effective way to move towards resolution rather than aggravating the problem. This map argues that value, relationship and external cause problems cannot be solved directly and quickly with the other party, and recommends focusing the conflict in the areas of data/information, structure and interests. By keeping the focus on differences in values, relationships and external causes that the team does not control, the conflict tends to escalate and become intractable.
The most important part of the circle to focus on is the area of interests, identifying the full range of interests (needs, fears and hopes) that the parties have in relation to the problem, focusing on their common interest, seeking solutions that maximise the achievement of both interests, trading low priority interests for more important ones.
Reification of the problem and common interest
Based on the methods of conflict resolution prefigured by other authors, here I propose a synthetic guide to face and resolve a conflict. These would be the steps to be taken:
- Identification and clarification of IT, i.e. the discrepancy, exploring where it comes from, what exactly is happening and what are the consequences. This is with the aim of detecting ‘the elephant in the room’, i.e. those issues that are obvious but ignored or avoided despite their unquestionable presence or relevance.
- Corroboration that all parties are in agreement to resolve the conflict, since if there is no willingness to move beyond discrepancies, any method of conflict resolution will not succeed.
3. Reification of the problem by asking team members to construct or choose an object that represents the discrepancy and place it somewhere physical and visible.
4. Analysis of the tasks, of the information, of the most technical part of the issue without blaming the other. Favouring explanations by the members in this style: ‘I didn’t get the information I needed to finish my task’, avoiding sentences with judgements such as ‘And this is really unfair. They always do the same thing’. Stating the facts in a more objective way helps the team to reduce emotional tension.
5. Analysing emotions without blaming by accompanying team members to express how they feel themselves without blaming or pointing the finger at others. Example: ‘I am sad or angry…’ instead of ‘I am frustrated or sad that you…’.
6. Focusing on the common interest that everyone has by asking ‘What do you have in common?’ and thus aligning team members to achieve that common interest without seeking agreement on causes and responsibilities for the conflict.
7. Action drive by asking what joint solutions the team sees after having identified a common interest (such as being the European leader in tango shoe sales).
8. Reification of the solution by asking the members what they want to do with the object that represents the discrepancy and proposing to build or choose an object that represents the solution.
If you want to define the rules of the game so that the team is prepared in case a conflict arises or analyse the situation to detect a hidden conflict or solve a conflict that has arisen in your organisation, book a first free online meeting with me.
