A disruptive member of your team
can cause real problems with other team members. A case recently comes to mind
where a new office manager was appointed. Jo was clearly very efficient at her
job and had the ability to get on with tasks given to her. But her manner was
abrupt and dismissive. She assumed that she had the right to interrupt and took delight in showing up other people's
faults.
Unfortunately her manager was too
busy to really notice, and so relieved that she had someone to pass some of her
workload to, that she chose to ignore the warning signs. She tried to paper over any issues with comments such as "Let's see how thing go." or " Now is not the time to address this."
Over a period of a
three of months, 1 person left and another tendered their resignation. Their
resignations caused a hole in the expertise in team. Luckily they realised at
this stage what the problem was and finally listened to their teams concerns. Jo,
who was still on probation, was asked to leave. However, although one resignation was
saved, Jo's manager had to spend a lot
of time recruiting new people to fill the hole that was left from the person
that did leave.
This situation was resolved quite
quickly, but sometimes problems can go on for months or on occasions years.
Ignoring the disruptive behaviour of one individual can have a much wider
ripple effect on the rest of the team.
Managers contribute to conflict
by communicating ambiguously, either intentionally or unintentionally.
Most of us want to avoid
conflict, but we can sometimes “talk out of both sides of our mouths” and give
mixed messages. Such ambiguous communication fosters an organizational climate
that discourages commitment (at best) and promotes conflicts (at worst).
I'm not saying managers do this
on purpose (although some do). But highly educated people are skilled in the
language of diplomacy and often try to address the needs and desires of a wide
audience. In trying to please everyone, they craft messages that border on
double-speak.
This is more of an explanation
but not a rationalization and it certainly isn't a good excuse.
Leaders need to be more direct,
frank and clear. I'd like to see more executives stand up and remove the
barriers to candour. Why don't more of them tell it like it really is?
Many managers are sitting
too close to the blackboard to see their own communication errors. An
unbiased professional coach or consultant can spot weaknesses and help correct
approaches that contribute to conflict. http://bit.ly/w84A5x
What do you
think about these possible sources that create more conflict instead of helping
people do their work in the best possible environment? I'd love to hear your
comments.
Check out The Useful Guide to Resolving Conflict
