Full: The Conflict Fuel Tank

As I coach tenured and new managers, one of the many recurring themes I hear about is the rampant interpersonal conflict within organizations. If there is conflict, the organization is not unique; in fact, if business owners believe there is little conflict among their team members, I am comfortable telling them they are wrong. 

Conflict avoidance is something we learn from a young age. Rather than addressing the way we feel, we look to our caregivers to fix the discomfort. While I am not suggesting you leave your young children to fight their battles on the playground without guidance, I do think there is validity in fighting our own battles from a young(ish) age. We were conditioned to have the parent, the sitter, the teacher, and then the boss, help fix our problems. Yes, I am a proponent of assisting employees in sorting through issues, but it is not about “doing it for them.” The enablement concept is closely linked with employee entitlement (and let’s make sure we are not encouraging that). 

The key here: do not avoid the topics that cause tension (employees often want to go around the issues) but instead we need to work through them. 

Avoidance of conflict, which mainly is attributed to our golden conditioning of thinking conflict is terrible, only fills the gas tank. Rather than simple disagreement, conflict is stored and builds upon itself. The person with whom you had a conflict now appears only to be or bring bad news. Typically, this is not the case – but we have filed it in our brain bank as “bad.” 

If you reach this point, it is probable you think addressing conflict is too exhausting and time-consuming. But the truth is: you need to face conflict as it rises. When you do not, it becomes overwhelming. You end up anxious, overly angry, and unsure as to why you despise a person so vehemently. 

If your conflict fuel tank is overflowing, it is time to start addressing (through), not avoiding (around) it. 

This article was first published on LinkedIn.

The Stay Interview

The stay interview, like the exit interview, is not a new practice. Business leaders are slow to implement the former which I argue is counterintuitive. Exit interviews offer institutions, government agencies, and firms alike insight into why employees leave and what organizational changes may prevent a like-caliber employee from moving on in the future. But, let us face it, the exit interview can only offer the potential to corrective action if the person receiving the exit interview information can actually use it – or better yet – make a useful change with the feedback.

An exit interview, while still valid for gathering knowledge, is more about cleaning up the pieces. It is also all too often emotionally fueled due to the upsetness (some) managers face by losing an employee. Conversely, the stay interview approach is about preparation. If a valued employee gleans perspicacity into a glaring problem, a manager has an opportunity. This opportunity is particularly unique because the awareness gained can be used to motivate and retain the "stay interviewee." Rather than a broad stroke, a manager has the chance to make slight adjustments for each team member, ensuring continued discretionary effort and fueling manager-subordinate discourse rooted in trust.

 To my earlier point, the individual receiving feedback from the employee needs to have either influence or a path to an individual who can influence - even if small - change. An unfortunate practice, one particularly common with exit interviews, is when senior leadership never even bothers to review the responses — what a missed learning moment. From recurring themes to insights about the type of employee that is less successful at the organization, the data offers a wealth of information.

Let us assume you are new to this but think the idea of engagement and retention sounds appealing. How do you get started?

Preface the stay interview conversation with the worth the employee offers the organization. Next, candidly share the importance of understanding their experience at ABC company, and that the following questions are to understand what is meaningful to them, and to learn what areas need development.

• What do you like most about working here?

• What do you like least about working here?

• Is there something you look forward to when you come to work each day?

• What keeps you here?

• If there is something you could change about your job, what would that be?

• What motivates you?

• What can I do better as a manager?

• What talents are not being used in your current role?

• What might tempt you to leave?

Do not forget to recap what you heard. Provide a real-time occasion for the employee to clarify or refine statements. Listening is an essential skill, after-all! Does your team member have a lot of sentiments about what needs to be changed? Set the expectation that change doesn’t happen overnight and be sure to communicate openly about what you have or do not have control over and what actions you will be seeking. A conversation without action (even if mostly positive) diminishes the value of a stay interview.

This article was first published via LinkedIn Articles

Culture Styles in the Workplace

This week we address cultural styles as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each. In previous weeks we discussed (1) how leadership influences culture and the foundational elements or assumptions about culture and (2) the dimensions of culture – including people interactions and response to change.

Under this framework, it is clear culture is multifaceted. Often leaders understand that culture is comprised of behaviors, environment, ethical constructs, cliques, mores, and the like. And, when a leader is tuned into the culture, it is not atypical to identify areas that need to be changed or adjusted. Below are eight cultural styles identified by Harvard Business Review (HBR). Each includes a brief description as well as correlating advantages or disadvantages.

To consider: With what style does your organization align? What areas could your organization benefit from adopting?

*A = Advantages
*D = Disadvantages

A Culture of Caring:

Unsurprisingly, Caring cultures are defined by being relationally focused. Behaviors of this culture are rooted in sincere connection and are associated with warmth and support.

A: Engagement is high, as is trust
D: Slowed decision making

A Culture of Purpose:

Does your organization offer, and abide by, explicitly clear direction? Then it likely functions under a Purpose culture construct. The aim is to achieve ideal outcomes.

A: Social importance increases, e.g., diversity or corporate social responsibility
D: Idealism may hinder addressing immediate concerns

A Culture of Learning:

This cultural undertone would easily fall under the interdependent dimension of culture that is tolerant to change. Learning cultures encourage innovation and exploration.

A: Organizational learning yields invention
D: May not capitalize on current competitive advantages (always looking for the next opportunity)

A Culture of Enjoyment:

The foundational elements of Enjoyment revolve around joy and play. HBR recognizes this construct as fun-loving. Although I do not see this culture often, we would be wise to adopt some of its attributes (due to the observed advantages).

A: Engagement is high, as is creativity
D: Playfulness may yield minimal discipline

A Culture of Results:

Unlike its Learning cultural brother, a Results culture is goal focused and achievement oriented. Under the cultural dimensions, you will see Results align with independent frameworks where competition and autonomy are valued.

A: Goal achievement and execution increases
D: Collaboration suffers and work/life stress increases

A Culture of Authority:

As the Authority term is defined – it is bold and dominant. There is little room for indecisiveness and sensitivity is not valued.

A: Speed to decision-making
D: Toxicity is common, e.g., feeling of unsafety/unease

 A Culture of Safety:

Just as children thrive with schedules and structure, stability can bring people comfort. A Safety culture is always prepared and looks to be rational and realistic.

A: Adequate risk management and stable environment
D: Formal approach may fuel bureaucratic processes, leading to inefficiency

A Culture of Order:

Similar to the philosophical notion of deontological ethics, rules are the guide under a culture of Order. Rules are referenced above all else, but value is also placed on respect and cooperation.

A: Reduced conflict with an improvement in operational effectiveness
D: Rules or constructs may lead to group-think and reduce individualization, affecting (decreased) creativity.

Like most conceptual frameworks, the benefit in understanding nuances is to discover reality, recognize opportunity, and take steps to adopt necessary change. When you reach this point, and need tactical steps to achieve a shift in cultural outcome, contact me.

HBR analyzed organizations, executives, and employees alike to develop a model to identify cultural and individual leadership styles. The eight characteristics above are pulled from HBR’s research; these characteristics are mapped along a grid, aligning with two dimensions as discussed last week: people interaction and response to change. For the full report and further detail, should you find this data collection useful, feel free to reach out and I will gladly send it along.

Two Dimensions of Culture

As learned last week, culture can influence behavior, and culture is often fueled from the top, i.e., leadership. Further, there are underlying assumptions about culture, e.g., its fortitude. Even with consistency among cultural assumptions, there are distinct differences in culture styles. HBR found that regardless of a company’s size, industry, or geography, there are two primary attributes or dimensions that remain the same. These dimensions are people interactions and response to change. [I did say I would dive into the cultural styles this week, but that will have to wait until I define these dimensions further!]

People Interactions

People interactions define a company’s tendency to place priority on independence OR interdependence.

• Does the organization value collaboration, relationship management, and the coordination of group processes/effort? Then it classifies as an interdependent-heavy structure.

• Does the organization focus on competition and stress the value of autonomy and individual contribution? Then it classifies as an independent-heavy structure.

Note: Interdependent organizations and independent organizations can be more thoroughly defined and understood by global cultural differences as well, even if the company is state-side.

The point here is that people define and create culture (not just one person does this – but the majority), and it is the dynamics of interpersonal communication that will dictate an overarching feel of the organization.

Response to Change

Change can be daunting. Psychologists Kurt Lewin and Edgar Schein researched the topic in detail and peeled back the layers of complexity. In short, it is human nature to resist change. It is even in our DNA to associate evolution with danger. But, the good news is once we know our brains react this way, we have the power to overcome the hesitancy to the thing we fear. Looking back to how change influences culture: some cultures place great importance on stability. Stability encompasses consistency, transparent structures, hierarchy, and processes. Other organizations favor flexibility, receptiveness to change, innovation, and openness.

It is no surprise that change resilience is a crucial dimension to culture. Will change shake the organization at its core, or will the organization as a whole see opportunity in change?

Under the dimension framework of people interactions and response to change, it is clear how organizations’ cultures vary. Where does yours fall? If you are aiming to change a culture – or even better: define your culture – it is necessary to grasp what aspects of these dimensions are exuded, practiced, and/or preached.

Cultural styles – and the advantages/disadvantages, are up next week. (For real this time!)