Conflict

(I believe that time is our most valuable asset and never want to waste it. Consequently, these posts appear a few times a month and take fewer than 4 minutes to read. The idea is to “poke the bear” and spark your curiosity. This one will follow suit, but it includes a link to a 12-minute(!) video that is worth every minute (or do what I do and watch it at 2X speed in 6 minutes). I promise you it is worth the time.)

It may not surprise you that a major problem I continually witness with teams I work with is conflict. But it may surprise you that it is not conflict itself, but the absence of conflict that is the problem. When a leader tells me their team has no conflict, I often suggest they find some.

It is not the presence of conflict that is the problem; it is its absence.

Many of the avoidable challenges and disasters we have faced are not because of hidden information. The information was in plain sight; many people saw it; no one was willing to risk the conflict to say it. (This is true in events as varied as the Bay of Pigs and the Challenger disaster).

There are many creators to the habits of conflict-avoidant teams. It starts when we hire “people like us.” It is as easy as it is common. “I like me—I think I’ll hire another me!” We hire people like ourselves because familiarity feels safer, more comfortable, and easier to trust. It continues when we “Go along to get along”—a habit born of a fear conflict, social rejection, or disrupting group harmony. (Psychologist Irving Janis coined the term groupthink to describe the disastrous result of this.) This tendency—rooted in our deep need for belonging—leads us to conform, even when it means silencing our own opinions or values. And as leaders, we often don’t tolerate productive conflict because we confuse disagreement with disloyalty or dysfunction. We fear that open conflict will undermine our authority, slow our progress, or create tension. Ironically, conflict, when handled well, is a hallmark of trust, not a threat to it.

Conflict, when handled well, is a hallmark of trust, not a threat to it.

Conflict is not our enemy. It is a catalyst for better ideas, improved decision-making, deeper trust and stronger teams. Watch this incredible TED Talk by Margaret Heffernan that chronicles Alice Stewart, the scientist who discovered the link between X-rays and childhood cancer, and George Kneale, her partner and a statistician who constantly challenged her assumptions. He was “paid to prove her wrong.” Their relationship, full of intellectual conflict, continues to save lives.

Here are four simple points that, once agreed upon, open doors for productive conflict:

1.    All of us is smarter than one of us

2.    We are not our ideas

3.    We attack (or, more softly, “vet”) ideas

4.    Best idea wins

If your team accepts and embraces these four points, the stage is set for healthy disagreement. The first explains the value and necessity of each member of the group; the second separates us from our ideas so that when we attack or vet an idea we are not attacking a person; the third makes it our responsibility to thoroughly vet each idea for the good of the organization and the fourth shows that it is the quality, not the provenance, of the idea that counts.

The idea that conflict strengthens teams may feel counterintuitive, especially in cultures that prize consensus and harmony. But in today’s fast-paced, complex world, we don’t need teams that agree—we need teams that argue well.

In today’s fast-paced, complex world, we don’t need teams that agree—we need teams that argue well.

Adam Grant says: “Argue like you’re right, but listen like you’re wrong.” The engine of great teamwork is the ability to tolerate and foster healthy, productive conflict.

When teams dare to disagree constructively, they surface better ideas, build deeper trust, and ultimately achieve better outcomes. Conflict, far from being the enemy, is the path to clarity, creativity, and coherence.

Is your team strong enough to disagree?