I recently watched a situation unfold where the concept of "respect" was at the heart of what became a conflict. There was an agreement of how the parties would refer to a situation they were trying to manage but when it unfolded publicly, the parties found themselves in conflict because their individual expectations were not in alignment; their "agreement" was based on assumptions. Accusations of "disrespect" were thrown at each other and each party sought allies to reinforce their position. This caused distress in the organization as sides were chosen and positions were polarized. This really upset the organizational vision that valued transparency, fairness and communication.

Respect has many meanings and if we aren't clear about what respect is to us personally, we risk failing to communicate the needs associated with respect to others. Respect - like fairness, a problem, equality, equity, inclusion, happy, fearful, etc. - can all have a different meaning for each of us. These differences are based on our values, life experience, socio-economic status, education, family culture, gender, race, age, and geography.

Our media is full of political rhetoric right now-it is an election year. I don't know about you but when I hear some politician support their statements and positions by citing "what the American people want", I wonder what American person that politician is referring to? These politicians don't know me and I am left feeling unheard and excluded. When I am sitting at the mediation table listening to two people in conflict and one person is unwilling to understand the impact of their behavior towards the other, saying "they shouldn't feel that way", it shows a disrespect for the other. The "they" in front of them does feel that way because they have different values and expectations than you. So the question is: how do we create an inclusive, equitable, fair and safe world where we can all live our lives?

I don't have a magic wand but I will offer - based on misunderstandings that lead to conflict - we can create a more harmonious world if we take time listen, be curious, ask questions, accept differences, and truly value connecting with and understanding the other people that we share this planet with. Or just our co-workers. We can also curb the generalizations and rhetoric politically, and recognize that "American people" are diverse and deserve to be both included and considered in all important decisions.

Revisiting the above scenario, when "respect" came up initially, the next step in the communication could have included, "What does respect look like for you?" "What specific actions do you need from me?" "What will feel disrespectful to you?". Instead, the parties went into automatic assumption mode and failed to understand what respect truly looked like for the other person. The conflict escalated and it wasn't until they both sat down to work through the issues that they began to understand each others needs. Their discussion also included how they would publicly share their agreement which included clarity, timing, who and what. It took some time for the organization to reset but the two initial conflict parties were able to effectively share a united front and be inclusive in how they moved forward in their recovery. They also demonstrated the organizational vision of being inclusive and transparent.

In pre-mediation work, when I meet one-on-one with clients to assess and confidentially hear about their perspective of the conflict, what their needs are, and ideas for resolution, I often find that I am talking to two (or more) people that both see themselves as a "victim". They were both equally hurt or wronged by the other and it is the other's responsibility to fix the problem. They are each "not the problem".

What is present in the perspective of each client is attribution theory, where we judge ourselves by our intentions and the other by the impact of their actions towards us. What is lacking in the perspective of each client is accountability.  "To be accountable means that we are willing to be responsible to another person for our behavior and it implies a level of submission to another's opinions and viewpoints." - Wayde Goodall. "For most people, blaming others is a subconscious mechanism for avoiding accountability. In reality, the only thing in your way is YOU." - Steve Maraboli.

Remember that when you point your finger at another, you have 4 pointing right back at you. Take a moment to consider your own actions and see if they align with the perspective of your "intentions". Put yourself in their shoes or step back, and take a look at your behavior from a third-party perspective. Does what you see reflect someone who is accountable or do you see someone who is rigid and difficult? Accountability means taking responsibility for your own contributions to the conflict. It might feel uncomfortable to make yourself vulnerable as you create space to consider how your behavior may be a contributing factor to the conflict. Further, if you are unable to move yourself into the space of accountability, perhaps there is a deeper psychological block that could be better explored with a therapist. We tend to retreat to familiar behaviors when faced with adversity, and often do so without even understanding why.

A skilled mediator will work with you to embrace opportunities that include building personal accountability through the mediation process. Ground rules to reduce trauma and create a safe space for dialog is one tool. Another is continuing to work together as well as in separate caucuses to explore issues and solutions privately. A skilled mediator will support opportunities for reconciliation and acknowledgment for behaviors experienced. A skilled mediator will also help the parties create accountability for how to best move forward that may include effective ways to address future conflict and minimize the negative impact.

Recently, I was asked to provide a workshop as part of an all day team building event. The team of 12 had been through some challenges and were on the other side of rebuilding their identity. During intake, I learned that this team tended to be scientific and logically oriented. When I suggested the topic of Emotional Intelligence and Communication, the supervisor enthusiastically supported. We agreed to a 2-hour virtual session.

I share this as a lesson in flexibility and collaboration. The supervisor had a prior team building experience in mind that left her feeling positive and excited. While I was unable to replicate the content of that experience, I was able to provide them with an engagement that left them feeling positive, excited and curious. The curiosity came from the opportunity to step out of the logical side of the brain and focus on building individual and team success through the engagement of emotional intelligence. This was done by demonstrating how emotional intelligence elevates the interpersonal experiences that we have with each other and offering actual ways to perform and engage in building our emotional intelligence. The team had the smarts and IQ that landed them the high level positions that they held; the awareness of the emotional intelligence competencies gave them the tools and opportunity to experience the personal success that may have been missing in their careers. And in life.

Feedback from the supervisor included: "she (provided) a...teambuilding session covering emotional intelligence, conflict management, and communication styles, synthesizing a large amount of data and providing it to staff in an easily understandable, digestible, and approachable manner."

Are you ready to elevate your teams performance and success? Call today to schedule a workshop.

Recently my city experienced 2 back-to-back extreme storms. These types of storms are being experienced throughout the US and across the globe. We aren’t unique and this seems to be the new norm. As I see the destruction and relive my own stress during that period, I wonder what it is that we can learn from this experience.  One thing seems to be that well intended policies created a decade or more ago to preserve an environmental goal may no longer be relevant. Portland is known for its trees and great pride is taken in preserving Douglas Firs, oaks, maples, and walnut trees that keep our city green. I can see 2 beautiful Sequoia trees that are 100’+ tall from my house. They are amazing and have an entire eco-system high up in the branches. These trees also share a 4,200 sq. foot lot with a house and at least one other tree. Some of these homes (and trees) are over 100 years old. Further, these magnificent trees are mere feet from fences, garages and homes. As I stood looking out at my neighbor’s stand of firs, 10’ from his roof and 30 feet from my house, watching them sway heavily with each 50-mph gust of wind, and laden with ice, I was feeling concerned. I sensed a conflict between well intentioned policies and the reality of change.
 
As residents of the city clean up and negotiate with arborists, plumbers, insurance, and the city itself, conflict is emerging. The city’s strict guidelines for tree preservation and the lack of autonomy for individual homeowner decision-making and safety has come to a head. Climate change means that trees and plants are stressed. For survival, the roots of some of these great trees are shallow in order to get enough water during the dry summers. Then the rains come, and it loosens the soil. Add the high winds that blow through the Columbia, and you have a giant potential killer. There are multiple stories emerging from these recent storms about how a tree fell on or near a home just missing a child or family member. Fortunately, most of the damage is to a structure that can be repaired and rebuilt. However, families are displaced, and lives are disrupted.
 
I love trees and am saddened when I drive out to the coast and through the mountains where there are visible scars from clear cutting. Whenever a see a logging truck, I “hear” the trees crying (or maybe it is just me). I love the greenness of my city; it is one of the reasons I chose to live here. I also see a city that is tearing down trees and communities to allow for development. The development approach is less tree and green oriented. The priority is maximizing the number of living units. This priority seems to increase heat as it reduces green space and includes no tree canopy. It almost seems that the city itself conflicts with its own policies.
 
The autonomy of the “current caretaker” of a tree (my neighbor of one of the giant sequoia trees referred to herself as such, which I loved!) is also responsible for the land, home and family that lives there. Decisions about whether a tree should remain or be removed is more complex than just a policy. The citizen resident lives with or next to a tree every day, gets to know that tree. If that citizen has a concern or request to remove a tree, the city representative has the opportunity to have a conversation with that resident. They can listen with curiosity, try to understand the perspective and work together to create an agreeable solution. Perhaps there is some assistance or guidance that can be offered. At the very least, empathy for understanding both the great responsibility that trees are for the humans (watering, picking up leaves, pruning) and the risks that they also pose (expensive maintenance, neighbor complaints, safety). Trees don’t have voices and humans need to be their voice and advocate. As the caretakers of these trees, many of these beautiful giants were planted before the current caretaker was born; we inherited the responsibility. And the trees that we plant today, will come into their own beauty long after we are gone, becoming someone else’s responsibility. The trees are counting on us to work together so that we can cohabitate together in peace. We need each other to be healthy.

#trees #conflictmanagement #cityofportland
 

Cole was hired in early 2021. Cole felt satisfied with the work he was asked to do and felt like he was valued as a contributing team member with his division. His organization is now expecting employees to work in the office at least 2 days per week. Cole was at first hesitant about working in the office but now that he has started to get into a routine, he is finding that he enjoys face time with other co-workers including taking lunch breaks with them. However, most of his division team members have been resisting coming into the office. He is feeling disconnected from them and feels like they are shunning him because he is following the rules about coming into the office. He has mentioned this to his direct supervisor, but she seems to be aligned with his other team members. He is not sure who to talk to and how to address what is becoming an uncomfortable situation. He feels like it is escalating because his teammates “forget” to invite him to meetings and has noticed that his supervisor is treating him differently. He is considering looking for another job. What would you advise Cole to do next?
 
Cole’s organization is going through a cultural change. Although Cole was hired during a period where organizations were adapting to keep business moving, another change was inevitable and that is where Cole’s organization now is. Cole’s organization has established expectations but seems to be lacking a process to address resistance. And Cole is unable to manage the conflict he is experiencing on his own. He has not been offered the tools that an integrated conflict management system provides to give direction and resolution when conflict is experienced.
 
Integrated Conflict Management Systems (ICMS) is a systemic focus on relationship management and early resolution of conflict at the lowest (and earliest) possible level. ICMS can be considered a component of risk management and organizational development.
 
Going back to Cole’s organization and looking at it through an ICMS lens: when leaders began to consider making a change to a hybrid work environment, how were employees engaged in making the decision? What options were offered? Were employees encouraged to collaborate as a team to design a structure to meet the expectations? When conflict arose, how was it managed? What creates and triggers conflict? Are supervisors trained in conflict management skills? How does the organizations mission and vision align with interpersonal conflict management and autonomy?
 
When leadership recognizes that conflict is beginning to impact the bottom line (i.e., quiet quitting, sabotage, customer service, EEO complaints), the first step is to assess organizational readiness for creating an ICMS. I have yet to find an organization that wasn’t ready for an integrated conflict management process. The challenge generally begins at the top. This includes building the support and commitment necessary to truly embrace systemic change and create the process – a process that is fluid.
 
One only need watch an episode of Succession or The Office to understand how conflict can destroy relationships, create chaos, and bring an organization to failure. However, an organizational culture that recognizes that conflict is both inevitable and an opportunity, will succeed where others fail. And employees like Cole can be retained as they will feel supported and know the options available to resolve conflicts.
 
ADR Group NW offers a complementary initial 30 minute ICMS assessment. Schedule one today!

'Perceptions of an organization's goals, priorities and needs are sometimes varied within an organization depending on who you ask. What does your website or internal messaging say about the organizations goals, priorities and needs? How is this messaging experienced by management and employees? How do employees message their goals/priorities/needs and how is management supported in their response to goals/priorities/needs? When perceptions and realities collide or fail to align, this can trigger conflict. Much of this is considered to be a "hidden" cost. But is it really? How much does it cost an organization when there is bad press? When an employee does just the basics of their job and no more? When a manager leaves because they are unhappy? It adds up quickly and actually can be quantified (see MTI Cost of Conflict Calculator).

What can leadership do to mitigate costs and reduce conflict? One thing is to conduct an assessment of organizational readiness to create and implement an Integrated Conflict Management System (ICMS). Just like the systems that you have in place for ordering, safety, HR compliance, and benefits, an ICMS is your process for how leadership and employees will manage and address conflict. Conflict is inevitable. It is 2024 and expectations for how people will show up together to work and support the organizations' mission is far more fluid and ripe for change. Change = Conflict. Why? Because when we ask someone to do something different, whether it is how paperwork is filled out or how we introduce ourselves at a meeting, it is unfamiliar. Unfamiliarity triggers our amygdala response of fear because it is different. Building skills around emotional intelligence along with developing a system for managing conflict will support growth, sustainability and resilience as leaders lead through change.

Attached is a resource for identifying goals, priorities and needs within an organization from the different perspectives. I invite you to use this resource as a tool and share with those that represent the different perspectives. I can partner with you in facilitating an important growth conversation to talk about the findings in this initial assessment and then building in collaboration a process for managing differences that is as unique as your organization and those that rely on its success. Perceptions Assessment.

In Brene Brown's short animated video about what empathy looks like in action, the "helpful" giraffe is consistently offering the "positives" to help counteract the sadness being expressed by the fox. The fox says that "he's getting a divorce". The giraffe responds, "at least you are married.". Not helpful and not empathetic.

When I came across an article in The Guardian online titled "Don't Insist on Being Positive -- Allowing Negative Emotions Has Much to Teach Us" (by Whitney Goodman), it resonated with me. As a mediator, I've noticed that when people in conflict start to get upset, mad, even heatedly passionate, they are being real and true to what they are feeling. While we want to create a respectful place for constructive conversations that build understanding and resolution, sometimes we need to express the real negative crap we are dealing with. It can be uncomfortable for everyone, including the person expressing the negative emotions, but it is also powerful in creating a path forward that honors truly what the needs are of the individual. When somebody is in pain and feeling negative emotions, such as a loss of a marriage, an empathic response is to just be there with that person, to let them know you are there and will remain there even during this discomfort.

The article references "toxic positivity" which has us programmed to believe that optimism is always best. A parallel in the conflict management world is avoidance and accommodation style of conflict responses. Accommodators are viewed as "yes" people who agree with others. Sometimes they are overly optimistic in their thinking that they will go along to get along. Many accommodators are often disappointed and surprised when no one ever actually shows concern or interest in what their needs and solutions are. This false sense of optimism leads accommodators to resentment and sabotage when others neglect to show empathy and interest in them.

The article further talks about how negative emotions are helpful. "Sadness" can be a "problem-solving emotion". How? "Sadness improves attention to detail, increases perseverance, promotes generosity and make us more grateful for what we've got." Further,"It's the emotion that helps us connect to others."

The challenge for us is that we have not been taught to effectively manage conflict and negative emotions. It feels unfamiliar and unsafe.

I attended a Trauma Informed mediation workshop at the 2023 ACR Conference. Mediators are learning both the value and need to lean in to negative emotions, recognizing that many of these feelings come from trauma that we carry. Creating a safe and trusting relationship with a conflict resolution professional, whether a mediator, facilitator or coach, is critical and includes holding space for negative emotions. As a mediator, I am actively building my own understanding of my relationship with negative emotions and trauma. My role is to be neutral and unbiased, but I am a human and find deep value in connecting empathically and humbly with my clients.

What's your relationship with negative emotions? How do they appear and how do they prevent you from fully experiencing empathy and resolution?

Guardian Article
Brene Brown's Empathy Video

A colleague shared an article on LinkedIn about Ryan Reynolds and what skill he credits to his successes. Say no more....you have my attention! Ryan Reynolds has accomplished much in his life and career. From how he laughs at himself and the industry in Deadpool, to marrying the beautiful Blake Lively, making gin in Portland (Aviation), or co-owning a football team in Wales, the guy is amazing and enjoyable to watch.

He credits his success on a course he took (on a whim) back in his 20's. He believes that the skills taught in this course are responsible for the success he has had in his life. The skill he learned? Conflict management. He recognized the value of trying to understand another instead of always trying to win or beat them. He has been able to develop empathy and compassion as he created space for differences.

In the documentary, Welcome to Wrexham, you can see this skill in action as he collaborates with his partners and gets to know the footballers and the passionate supporters in the small community. He takes time to listen, ask questions, show genuine interest and concern. He also demonstrates collaboration, trust and a true interest in building success with all stakeholders.

Just another reason for me to appreciate Ryan Reynolds...

For the article, link here.

An article about toxic relationships just flashed across my feed (algorithms!!). To me, the term "toxic" categorizes someone who is difficult and best avoided, but not dismissed. Someone who you find difficult but maybe not in all situations. According to the article from the Atlantic, "toxic" is used to dismiss people when they do something that offends or expresses a strong emotion towards another. It shuts down any responsibility of the "victim" in recognizing their role and how they can be a part of the solution. It can create a huge divide that can damage families, roommates, neighbors and intimate relationships. According to the article, we are seeing "toxic" in social media and in personal relationships. When someone is labeled as "toxic", they can become an outcast.

While there are toxic relationships and toxic individuals, placing a label of "toxic" can potentially escalate a situation. And when we label others ("smarter", "dumber", "late", "fat", "skinny", etc.), we create a bias about how we see the other and how we project to others. Instead of using "toxic", be descriptive; describe the behavior that is creating conflict for you. "I get annoyed when you interrupt a conversation to talk about yourself because I never get to finish collecting the information that I needed. I would appreciate it if you would wait until I'm done having the conversation before you interject."

Be careful about labels and be aware of when we are using terms, such as "toxic" and the bias you are expressing. Check in with yourself to make sure that you aren't avoiding addressing an issue and escalating a conflict simply based on your own thoughts and behavior.