By Fred Kofman
Philosopher and Vice President at Linkedin
“So oft in (organizational) wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!”
— John Godfrey Saxe
An appropriate conflict is not a problem. On the contrary, it is the best way for teammates to collaborate and help the team win.
An appropriate conflict arises when team members differ about the best way to pursue their common goal. This may be because, as the proverbial blind men who went to see the elephant, they are touching different parts of the picture. (See poem at the end of the post.)
One of the most difficult challenges for any team is to make decisions with incomplete and decentralized information about costs and benefits. Each team member has some data about his local environment and partial knowledge about how each strategy can affect his or her performance metrics. But no team member has all the relevant data or the full knowledge about how each strategy can affect the team goal.
For example, if you are in sales, you may know that discontinuing a current product will disappoint some customers and produce a loss in revenue, but you don’t know how much can be saved in costs by such decision. If you’re in accounting, you may know that discontinuing a current product will save some costs, but you don’t know how much will be lost in revenue by such decision.
The salesperson and the accountant are touching different parts of the “elephant.” Only when they integrate their information can they maximize the profits of the organization.
Much as we’d like to think that costs and benefits could be assessed accurately, these variables are not really observable. How much will the organization really save from discontinuing the product depends on factors such as which costs are fixed and which variable–and in what time frames. How much will the organization really lose from discontinuing the product depends on factors such as how many customers will switch to other products, what are the profit margins of those products, and how much will customers not buy from the because of the discontinuation.
Honest, intelligent and well-intended people can disagree about these things, giving rise to an appropriate conflict.
Clean escalation means involving a more senior person in the discussion to help integrate the information, bring a more systemic perspective, and make a judgment call if necessary.
Another term for clean escalation is “systemic collaboration,” since both conflicting parties agree that it is best to engage their manager’s help to make a system-optimizing decision.
A clean escalation fulfills the following criteria:
A clean escalation doesn’t guarantee the right decision, but it produces a more intelligent process that strengthens relationships and helps everybody feel appreciated as valuable contributors.
In this video, you can find out more about how clean escalation helps resolve organizational conflicts as one team.
To learn more about bringing consciousness into your business, please visit HERE.
Step-by-step guidance for developing mindfulness for your health, relationships, career, meditation and more!
Discover the world's most popular mindfulness meditation scripts that make a positive impact on people's well-being.
Sean Fargo is the Founder of Mindfulness Exercises, a former Buddhist monk of 2 years, a trainer for the mindfulness program born at Google, an Integral Coach from New Ventures West, and an international mindfulness teacher trainer. He can be reached at [email protected]
What You Practice Grows Stronger
Help Others Manage Emotions
The Mindful Leader
SIY 103.5 – Leading with Compassion
SIY 103.4 Empathy
SIY 103.3 Motivation
SIY 103.2 Self Regulation
SIY 103.1 Self Awareness
Please log in again. The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.