A632.6.3.RB_DavisCarl The High Cost of Conflict

Welcome to week six of Decision Making for Leaders at the Educated Leadership blog. This week, we are looking at conflict resolution. Our text, for your reference, is called “Getting to Resolution”, by Stewart Levine (2009). One of the tools that Mr. Levine supplied to us is called the “Ten Principles of New Thinking” (2009, p.46). The new principles are presented next to old thinking principles on a chart. I’ll recreate it here:

Old Thinking	New Thinking
1.    Scarcity	1.    Believing in abundance
2.    Wasting of resources	2.  Creating partnership
3.    Problems, issues, emotions	3.  Being creative
4.    Fostering conflict	4.    Fostering creative collaboration
5.    Righteous bravado, posturing	5.    Becoming open
6.    Short-term adversary	6.    Forming long term partnerships
7.    Logic	7.    Relying on feelings and intuition
8.    Secrecy	8.    Disclosing information and feelings
9.  Winning	9.  Learning throughout the resolution process
10. Deferring to professionals	10.  Becoming ResponseAble ©

(Levine, 2009, p.46)

As I read through the items I was drawn to thinking about a situation at work that I have been involved with for the better part of ten years. The veritable sins of “old thinking principles” have run rampant through the organization for a long, long time. In the past, I was as guilty as anyone in in helping to maintain the often ego-driven style of thinking. Secrecy, winning, righteous bravado, scarcity, wasting of resources, short-term adversarial relationships were the order of the day, every day. Those were the rules of the game, and in order to survive, one learned how to play by those rules. Information hoarding was a recognized management style, as was passive-aggressive meeting conduct. Talented people left the organization as soon as they could find a way out. On top of having a list of deliverables that were huge drivers of stress, the internal strife and competitiveness made going to work an almost dreadful affair.

As an aside, I hearken back to one fine day as a plebe at the U.S. Naval Academy. A Marine Corp Major was talking to us about learning to follow before we could learn to lead people. He made the point numerous times that one can learn loads from one’s leader, as a follower, about how to lead. He was even more adamant that we should be on the alert to note ways we would never want to lead, as well. We should make note of poor leadership and vow not to commit the same mistakes when we were leaders. That message has been in the forefront of my mind ever since.

In my first eight years at the company, I would say I had the opportunity to see how NOT to lead far more than I ever saw good examples. That fact was one of the drivers for me choosing this particular degree path. When I occasionally think of the cost in time, money, and PEOPLE that those old ways imparted on our organization I am at once shocked and saddened. The opportunities for success that were missed were manifold. Watching employees burn out trying to make up for a lack of unified direction and support was heart-wrenching. I came seriously close to giving up more than once.

As the years progressed, and in a more accelerated manner over the last two years, there has been a change in thinking trying to make its way through. Many of the new thinking principles are being cultivated and coached by a new group of senior managers. As I have moved up the organization I have attempted to bring an open, learning culture to wherever I am stationed. I have seen positive results in the way people interact and the overall performance of teams of which I have been privileged to be a part. Partnership and collaboration are huge drivers in gaining positive alignment of groups. Looking at shortfalls and errors as opportunities to learn, instead of admonish, acts as a catalyst teams to be willing to grow and expand their skill set. It really is wonderful to watch.

As an organization, have we made a complete transition to the new principles? We’re not close. We have miles to go before we sleep. There are groups in the building that have maintained using the old principles and show little indication of wanting to change. Interestingly, their age demographic falls toward the older end of the average in the organization with a stagnant roster. Younger groups, with a bit more turnover, allowing for experience in other parts of the company to flow in, tend to be more open to the new ideas.

We have a handful of new executive leaders who are attempting to lead the culture change to utilizing the new principles. Having their commitment to the new ways and a degree of “top cover” they can provide has made it easier for senior managers, like me, to implement change. It has been a welcome breath of fresh air. Will we ever make up for the cost penalties and loss of talent? It would take a century, I think. The lost trust and bitterness still lurks beneath the surface of many meetings and other interactions.

I could not, and will not sanction the use of the old principles in any group I am lucky enough to lead. Servant and transitional leadership styles, those to which I ascribe, flourish in the new principles. The world is too dynamic, information too free flowing, for the old principles to lead to success. It is only correct, however, to learn and understand the old principles, because they are still embedded in many places. As George Santayana wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.” (1905, p. 284)

See you next week!

Levine, S. (2009). Getting to resolution - Turning conflict into collaboration (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Satayana, G (1906). Reason in Common Sense. London, England: Archibald Constable & Co., Ltd.