Let's talk about managing conflict in teams. Now the most important thing to recognize here, is that we have two fundamentally different types of conflict that teams face. One is called task conflict, sometimes it's also referred to as cognitive conflict. The other type is relationship conflict also known as affective conflict. Now, task conflict is focused on disagreements about the task at hand. So, I might disagree with you about the distribution channel which is used for our product. Or about the assumptions we're making in net present value calculations. So I can tell you, John, I disagree with your approach on this particular task. Relationship conflict, in contrast, is focused on personalities and relationship dynamics. It entails and is described by interpersonal incompatibilities, animosities, tensions. So, I can say John, you're incompetent. You're the problem in our team. The reason it's so important for us to differentiate between these types of conflict, is because they have vastly different consequences for team performance. Task conflict, if managed well, can be beneficial for team performance. It's a type of conflict that increases divergent view points, opinions, interpretations, that enhances critical thinking and problem solving within teams. Task conflict is the type of conflict that can help you break that proverbial groupthink or ineffective consensus in teams. Relationship conflict invariably leads to detrimental consequences for team performance. It is highly destructive, it threatens viability of the team, it diverts energy. It minimized communication and collaboration within teams, minimizes general good will, it negatively impacts working relationships within teams. It makes teammates less perceptive to the ideas of other teammates. And in the end your team spends time working on task irrelevant issues, as opposed to focusing on the task at hand. So, this graph here shows the results of some of our own research at Michigan. That demonstrates the distribution of types of conflict across teams. So, specifically, what this graph shows is that 31% of teams are described by low levels of task and relationship conflict. And 29.1% of teams have both high levels of relationship and high levels of task conflict. So looking at this graph, think about what teams here underperform. Now it's essential to recognize that all these teams highlighted in red are at the risk of underperforming. The low/low teams, the teams that are described by low levels of task and low levels of relationship conflict, are the teams that avoid any sort of disagreement, any sort of debate. They're focused on getting along. These are the teams that are particularly prone to groupthink. Now you don't wanna be in the top row either. Because these are the teams that have high levels of relationship conflict, and that conflict is detrimental for team performance. Now a particularly interesting case, is the top right corner, which are the teams that are high on both relationship and task conflict. Most typically what happens here is that teams are unable to control escalating and increasing levels of task conflict. That spirals out of control and transforms into relationship conflict. One of the major causes of relationship conflict is increasing and escalating task conflict. It's the teams end up in the bottom right corner, the ones that are high in task conflict and low in relationship conflict, that are most likely to capitalize on the benefits of constructive debate. Now there are two risks that we need to keep in mind with respect to excessively high levels of task conflict. First of all, high levels of task conflict, exceptionally high levels of task conflict, can make implementation difficult because it might be harder to reach consensus. And secondly, high levels of task conflict can lower satisfaction in your team. And keep in mind, that even if task conflict produces benefits for your team performance. You're typically at a higher risk of developing relationship conflict. What research also tells us is that the important temporal aspects of conflict management that we need to keep in mind. A study by Karen Jehn and Elizabeth Mannix shows that high performing teams have low levels of relationship conflict throughout the team's life cycle. And there task conflict peaks at about midpoint of a team's life cycle. And it's the timing of the task conflict, coupled with the absence of relationship conflict, that allows these teams to fully capitalize on the benefits of constructive debate. Such as enhancing information flows, more critically evaluating divergent ideas and just staying more focused on the task at hand. In ow performing teams, in contrast, you can see that relationship conflict increases throughout. So how do we mitigate relationship conflict? First of all, establish and reinforce norms that make vigorous debates the norm rather than the exception. If we install these norms in our teams, I'm less likely to take criticism personally. I'm also more likely to become a more skilled debater. Where I criticize the ideas without attacking the individuals. Insist that the debates are resolved by referencing facts, assumptions, revisiting decision rules. Not by the power of the loudest voice. You want to address relationship conflict early, at the earliest signs of interpersonal tensions and animosities. Try to transform, if possible, relationship conflict into task conflict. The absolute key precondition here is for your team to agree on a shared goal and shared vision. I really love this quote by Steve Jobs, who said that it's ok to spend a lot of time arguing about which route to take to San Francisco. When everyone wants to end up in San Francisco. But a lot of time gets wasted in such arguments if one person wants to go to San Francisco and another person secretly wants to go to San Diego. Now if some of our teammates secretly want to go to San Diego, have that secret private goal, that's incongruent with the shared goals of the team. Not only does that result in wasted time, but that puts your team on a fast track to relationship conflict. Because one of the key causes of relationship conflict is divergence of values and goals. So install procedures in your teams that would enable people to share their private goals and values. And invest in relationships, so that people feel comfortable and trusting enough to share that information with you. You also want to avoid inflammatory language, and ask people to restate their views if you feel such inflammatory language is used. So for example, if someone says that Mark is disruptive and is not pulling his weight on the team, ask them to state what specific behaviors are disruptive and what specific contributions can be improved and how. If you feel like your relationship conflict is serious enough, it might make sense to take that discussion outside of the team meeting. And finally, manage task conflict iteratively. Keep in mind that one of the major causes of relationship conflict is escalating an increasing task conflict. So don't allow for too much divergence in your teams for too long. Make sure that you reach iterative agreements along the way. So at this point I'm gonna ask you to watch an episode of conflict resolution and think about whether you find that approach to resolving conflicts effective.
