Looking inside as a team
By Kim Jong-nam
The ability to look inside oneself is one of the most important keys to success for any individual. Indeed, the same goes for groups or organizations. I think about this quite often when I am asked to diagnose and resolve inter-group conflict. Teams and departments cannot produce excellent outcomes without communicating and collaborating with other teams or departments, so resolving these conflicts is second to none in terms of creating a high-performing organization. Here are some things that every stakeholder should consider before tackling these conflicts.
First, teams need to arrive at an actual consensus about who exactly the source of the problems is. All teams and departments have to work with many others, which means they will necessarily encounter teams or departments that cause more friction. Members of the group who are louder may identify a certain entity as being the most problematic, but, if you ask other members of the group, they may identify quite different parties as the source. Whenever I conduct on-site diagnoses, I find that the opinions of employees and managers about the other groups in the organization vary wildly. This is especially true in large teams. If your team cannot agree on how other teams should be seen, it will be more difficult to approach inter-team issues. Thus, before talking about issues with any other team, each must take time to make sure its members are on the same page. In particular, quantifying the level of satisfaction of communication and collaboration with other teams/departments is essential to figuring out which inter-team conflicts are priorities.
Second, once team members agree on which party is causing the most issues, team members must now agree on what exactly those issues are. Members in a team tend to think differently about what the problem is. Many teams do not realize that there exists such a diversity of opinion within their members. However, when I collect opinions about frequent problems with other teams or departments, I see that this is the case. Without knowing what the majority of members actually agree is a problem, approaches cannot be found that will be supported by the whole team.
Thus, each team or department should put in the time to delineate what the problems are with a high degree of specificity. Team members should also agree on what's important and what's not important. These discussions must be held internally before approaching other parties to resolve conflicts with them. Merely mentioning “communication issues” or “unkindness” is not enough. More specific and concrete problems must be identified. This will be helpful because the other party will justify their behaviors or attitudes unless it is very clearly explained to them exactly what issues their behaviors/attitudes are causing.
Third, more than anything else, the tendency to demonize other parties without giving them the benefit of the doubt is counterproductive. Since each team or department is different from others in terms of what they do, how they are composed, what their objectives are, or what their situation is, they will naturally behave in different ways. However, this difference can cause confusion and even conflict between teams. That is why they should make sure to communicate between themselves and take time to take the other's different circumstances into consideration. The tendency to automatically blame any issues on others must also be avoided at all costs.
When groups meet and talk, their attitudes toward each other then become quite different from what they were when each was complaining about the others privately. When teams actually meet, their levels of seriousness and self-awareness become much higher and they become better able to understand both the issue at hand and their counterparts' responses.
Kim Jong-nam is the founding CEO of META (www.imeta.co.kr) and a global organizational development consultant who specializes in organizational culture and leadership.