During the performing stage, there is agreement among the team members about what needs to be done and how it will be accomplished. A clear mission, goals, individual roles and performance expectations are established which results in a clear progression toward the goal. Feelings of satisfaction, understanding, cooperation, productivity and a close attachment to the team develop during this stage.
Finally, the adjourning stage occurs. This stage is characterized by the ending of or closure of the team’s existence. The team may experience feelings of sadness, awkwardness, a sense of loss, relief, and sometimes elation. Understanding these five stages of growth will help keep the team from overreacting to normal “growing pains” and will help a team set realistic expectations to avoid frustration.
Conflict Resolution
“Conflict can be used as the spur to find the wider solution, the solution that will meet the mutual interests of the parties involved” (Bennis & Lessem, 1994). Resolving a conflict is like suffocating a smoldering flame; however, prior to constructing a resolution, the source and cause must be determined. L.L. Putnam describes the “sources of conflict” as the following:
1. Substantive- When a debate arises over issues that affect their community as a whole.
2. Procedural- A debate that arises over the process used to attain the goal.
3. Affective- A debate over individual insecurities or self-esteem issues and differing
personalities.
DeJanasz-Dowd-Schneider contends that the most common causes of negative conflicts within a group would include unresolved anger, low self-esteem or confidence, unclear or opposing views, miscommunication, problems of efficiency, and unfinished business. Additional causes would include the following:
-
Cultural Differences- Personal beliefs, values and ethics prohibiting individual contributions.
-
Personality Clashes- Behavioral attributes unyielding compromise.
-
Participation- The lack of individual contribution due to exterior occurrences, motives and aspirations.
-
Electing a Team Member-Inability to reach an agreement.
By identifying the source and cause of the conflict, an analysis can be made by using an appropriate conflict management method. The 4r’s method for analyzing a conflict suggests dissecting the issue by the reasons why the members of the team interact with each other the way that they do, the reasons associated with their behavior towards one another, the results of the consequences and approaches used throughout the group, and lastly, selecting an applicable approach towards a resolution.
Approaching Conflict
According to Sheila Porter’s, Managing Conflict in Learning Teams, the team must first understand the nature of the conflict in order to find the best method to approach it. She further suggests that no single approach can best fit the situational nature of learning team conflicts.
Ralph H Kilman and Kenneth W. Thomas’s work, The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument explains that there are five general ways to approach conflict. They have been interpreted as follows:
-
Avoidance- Used if the conflict does not relate to the teams main objective. This can also be used if the situation finds its way out of control, in other words, to table the issue until all parties have had an opportunity to thoroughly think things through.
-
Accommodation- Used when the objecting team members view the conflict as unimportant to the central objective. In other words, they can live with the decision and they feel that it is in the group’s best interest to move on.
-
Competition- Used when a team member feel so strongly about their own perspective that they try to influence the other members to see things the same way. This is also an appropriate approach if a team member feels that the decision being made could be viewed as unethical, illegal or impractical. “Win-Lose approach”
-
Compromise- Used when time is running short or other methods have not been able to bring the group to full agreement on a decision.
-
Collaboration- Use when time permits or when 100% commitment is needed from each member. All members must agree on a decision.
Resolution Processes
J. Wisinski who authored the book ‘Resolving Conflicts on the Job’ developed a framework of thought for the individual team members to consider when resolving conflicts. Wisinski named this thought process the A-E-I-O-U model. It is a course of thought to consider prior to trying to resolve the conflict and interpreted as follows:
- A- Assume that team members all mean well with their input.
- E- Express ones own feelings to the group
- I- Identify what you would like have happen.
- O- Outcome/Open mind- Tell your team what you would like to see the outcome be while keeping an open mind for their input.
- U- Understanding- Every member of the team should thoroughly understand the decision and commit to stand by it
Process to Resolve Conflict
Once conflict has reared its head, it needs to be dealt with accordingly. In order for a team to be productive, all members must be on the same page. As stated above there are many ways to accept the conflict and move on, but there will be times which the issue needs to be dealt with differently. (Porter, 2003)
The first attempt to conflict resolution should come in the way of negotiation. All team members are working toward a common goal. Some have ideas which they think are better and for very good reasons. Negotiation means to make some consolations, give in toward the areas which are less important and stand strong where necessary. This will take time to evaluate what areas are most important by developing a value list. Not only should a list be created, but an explanation of why that particular subject is so important to the end goal needs to be included. Once the conflicted members share their lists, they will often see that their values are matched and they can easily accommodate each other. (Porter, 2003)
If the values are still very conflicting, then a mediator will need to be introduced. The mediator can look at the lists and help provide an outside perspective on the issue. The mediator has the ability to look at the goal and the proposed directions to the goal and make comments and suggestions without the influence of personalities or previous conflict. The mediator will not make the decisions for the team, but rather help them negotiate. (Porter, 2003)
The last resort is to have an arbitrator. This is similar to going to court. The decision will be made and there will be winners and losers. Fortunately, this is a very rare instance within teams. Most adults working toward a common goal are able to compromise enough to get the job done. (Porter, 2003)
Conclusion
Whenever people are brought together to accomplish a task there is always that first uncomfortable silence. No matter the setting, it always happens. Who will be the first to speak? Who will be the first to open up to the group? This uneasy silence is the beginning of team dynamics. How this group of people proceed after this initial meeting usually depends on how the team reacts to one another and how the team can overcome conflict that will ultimately arise.
We see that teams go through several stages of development before they become comfortable enough to focus on the task at hand. Once a level of acceptance has been worked out, team members can then begin to attack the problem from various directions. After the problem has been resolved, the team will then usually disband and move on to new challenges.
Ultimately, conflict will come about during a teams march toward its goals. This conflict can come about for several reasons: cultural and personality differences, procedural approaches, and one’s opinion of how effective the team’s approach is. In the majority of these cases, the more communication there is within a team, the less chance there is for conflict to arise. Team members must communicate their ideas and feelings toward others in the group. As a team member, it is essential that you must keep an open mind when listening to other individuals.
The best teams, no matter what field or endeavor, must keep an open line of communication going at all times. If not, the ugly conflict monster will always win the battle.
References
Bennis, W. Parikh, J., & Lessem, R (1994). Beyond Leadership: Balancing economics,
ethics, and ecology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Business, p. 140
DeJanasz, S.C., Dowd K.O., & Schneider B.Z. (2002). Interpersonal Skills in
Organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill. P.p. 371-393, 241-259.
Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2004). Organizational Behavior (6h ed). New York:
McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Pp.414-415.
Porter, Sheila.(2003) Managing Conflict in Learning Teams. University of Phoenix
pp 1-9. As downloaded on 3/21/05 from University of Phoenix Learning Team
Toolkit.
Putnam, L.L. (1986). Conflict in a group decision-making. In R.Y. Hirokawa & M.S.
Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage,
pp. 175-196.
University of Phoenix. (2004). Learning Team Toolkit.
