The most overlooked potential for maintaining and potentially increasing profit during a down economy is to focus on your staff. If you are seeing an increase in absenteeism, tardiness, turnover, passive aggressive behavior, or congregation around the coffee pot, you may have problems. These problems are typically associated with unacknowledged conflict. The conflicts may be caused by things such as personality differences and work stresses and may be between two or more employees, between an employee and a supervisor or any combination of personnel.As a business manager, you may often ignore these conflicts because of their relationship to emotional and stress factors. Left unattended, these unsettled conflicts are robbing your bottom line…big time.Most employee turnover is a result of unresolved conflict. Studies suggest that your cost to replace an employee is between 75-150% of that person’s annual salary. Passive aggressive behavior and related symptoms of conflict are also affecting profit in terms of cost overruns, stolen time, poor quality products, customer dissatisfaction and potential loss of customers.Conflict does not magically go away. As a manager and leader, you must take steps toward resolution. Avoidance is rarely the best solution because when conflict goes unresolved you lose your best employees, not the “problem” employees.Our next article “Five steps to resolve conflict in the workplace” will offer you some advice on how to get started towards conflict resolution.
What we learned from "what we learned". Obama/Romney Debate
The Presidential Debate in Denver on Wednesday night gave reporters plenty of things to write about --who won, who lost and what it all means. One source (CNN.com) posted an article entitled "5 Things We Learned From the Presidential Debate". It lists five aspects to be taken from the debate to determine what should be, or was, gleaned from the exchange between Governor Romney and President Obama. Yet, none of the listed items has any substance; none matter when either gentleman takes office.Debates are all about who wins at arguing with the winner determined by a moderator(s). Substance matters for naught, and as we see in these "things we learned" articles, not even considered. Reports have concluded that Romney "won" this debate based on his positive demeanor, body language and tone, while Obama lost for the more negative levels of these. The CNN.com article claims Obama missed opportunities to attack Romney and slip in some 'zingers' that would make Obama look better, and possibly better his chances to 'win' this debate.But, big deal. Whether Romney looked at ease, or Obama missed chances to win a debate, does not negate the importance of topics concerning America. Or at least they shouldn’t. And while news articles and opinion pieces announce what we learned from posture, tone and pursed lips, they underscore the emptiness of salience of presidential debates on either candidate being qualified for the office of president. In other words, the issues facing America, how they were discussed, and what the candidates offered to address these issues were not even touched upon in these articles. Who cares what each candidate looked like, how they spoke or if they were at ease or angry? Apparently our news sources do.So, what did we learn from "what did we learn" pieces? That many journalists and political pundits (and probably a good part of the population) think the debates offer (and should offer) only superficial factors that help calculate which gentleman is the better candidate. And this highlights one problem with Debate: that one side has to win, no matter which superficial factors are used for this determination. In the meantime, issues are ignored, discussion and collaboration shut out, and solutions unreached. The presidential debates, in their current form anyway, only serve to diminish the vetting of candidates based on substantive factors.A better approach is to have a sit-down discussion between candidates and a neutral facilitator with a flexible structure and loose time limits. Perhaps even the candidates do not want this.Don't debate, collaborate.
Making the choice between your friend and your politician
The presidential debates are looming, and many of us need to be reminded how to avoid turning our friends into enemies. The tips below will help you maintain sanity during the political season and avoid the need to choose between your friends and your candidates.
- Remember every issue has many viewpoints; strive to understand them.
- Listen to what is meant and how you are receiving it rather than how it is stated.
- Ask questions to clarify meanings.
- Focus on the issues, not the person.
- Be respectful; no name-calling.
- Ask yourself whether you have all of the facts. Be open-minded and willing to learn.
- Keep the doors open to areas of common agreement and new ideas.
- Practice patience.
The key to working through all types of disagreements is to strive toward understanding the other person’s perspective. If you understand where they’re coming from and why they believe what they do, then they are more likely to act in kind and recognize your opinion on the issue.Remember that, unless you destroy the relationship now, your friends will be around long after your candidate’s term has ended. Also, be sure to consider how boring the world would be if we all agreed on everything.If you want more information, read about our efforts to encourage productive conversations through Pub Dialogues.
Pub Dialogues session 1.4
Congress and You Our 5th session of the Pub Dialogues will be held at Pints Pub and Freehouse July 16th (Monday) from 5:30 - 8pm. We will be upstairs at reserved seating.The topic for this session is Congress; how are they doing? How do you relate to Congress, and vice versa? Is Congress doing enough? Are you doing enough? This is a good opportunity to rethink our connection with our representatives, with each other, and perhaps with ourselves. Let the ideas flow!
From the Inside Out: First Level Conflict Management
The field of Conflict Resolution has grown in the last 30 years, concentrating on processes such as peace building, mediation, truth commissions, and reconciliation to name a few. The impact of Con-Res has become increasingly noticeable and its methods sought after. Yet these reactive efforts do not go far enough. Like the old saying goes, Give a man a fish; you've fed him for a day. Teach him to fish; and you've fed him for a lifetime, education of Con-Res skills needs to focus on the individual and daily life to establish a proactive approach to managing conflict.The above services (mediation et al) are enacted as a conflict intensifies, at the cessation of violence, or after it concludes (although this is a gray area). Damage has already been done, or is accruing. Many people do not possess basic Con-Res skills, which increases the possibility that seemingly harmless misunderstandings will escalate to damaging conflicts, and the need for third party intervention becomes more and more evident. Effective management of conflict requires personal Con-Res skills, with reactionary services on-board as important back-up procedures.If more people (ideally everybody) were to possess basic Conflict Resolution skills, then many problems, disputes, and conflicts can be prevented or managed effectively at the “first” level, thereby decreasing costs (financial, emotional, relational, physical, etc) of prolonged discontent. It is important to note that this approach will not solve every problem, or eliminate every conflict. Conflict is inevitable and a necessary condition of life; managed effectively it promotes change, progression, and innovation. To take advantage of contentious situations requires proactive measures as well as reactive services.Now is the time to teach, provide, and encourage personal Con-Res skills, especially to the youth and future generations. I see four pillars upon which more advanced methods can be learned and practiced:
- Intrapersonal Communication: Communication as it pertains to an individual (one side of an exchange). How language, word selection, tone, volume, phrasing, body language, listening and understanding the audience affects communication. “How did your leg break?” isn’t as accusatory as “How did you break your leg?”
- Critical Thinking: Analyzing a situation to better select communication methods, understanding consequences of actions, acknowledging the role of emotions, increase clarity in explaining interests/positions, and recognizing the impact each of these may have on others. Does placement of trash cans inhibit easy access for the sanitation workers? How would sanitation workers be affected if I place the cans in a cumbersome way? How would they react?
- Situational Awareness: Understanding the context in which conversations, actions, disagreements, and commonalities exist. Should I ask my friend for some money while within a group of people, or in private?
- Patience: To deal with emotions effectively and efficiently, not jump to conclusions, in explaining situation/reactions/motives/etc. Frustrations and emotions arise in disputes and even common communications. The ability to endure these with a clear (or clearer) head is vital to the resolution of conflict. Is someone going through a difficult time and needs to vent, not really meaning what they say even if it’s offensive to me?
Essentially these pillars become a way of life more so than a way of thinking. These basic skills would enhance reactionary services when they are needed (such as the NFL Lockout mediation). They can be built within the person, preparing them to better manage whatever conflict situation they encounter in their walk in life. Although conflict management is never easy, people can be more empowered to resolve many conflicts themselves prior to sustaining damages.This education can be applied within public school curricula, personal coaching or tutoring, community classrooms and corporate on- and off-premise training sessions. The lessons and skills can be applied along the broad landscape of human interaction: from space exploration to day-care; from daily family life to business marketing. As long people interact the need for conflict management will persist.
The Story Behind Oval Options
The majority of research in our field of practice revolves around academic study and theories. These theories suggest that people should always sit at a round table -- both literally and figuratively. They suggest that all decision makers should be present at meetings and that power and other factors should be balanced evenly among all participants in the process. You’ll even find that our competition often refers to “round-table solutions.” We see a round table as a very idealistic approach to conflict. Although we have a round table in our office, we recognize that a round, balanced table is an option, and even something to strive for, but it is rarely the reality in conflict. If differing power dynamics didn’t exist, the conflict probably wouldn’t either. It is our job to work with the situation that is presented and help our clients find the most realistic and appropriate resources. With these factors in mind we chose an Oval to represent our company and the processes we use, because it more accurately displays the imperfections of the world in which we work. Finally, options are what we offer our clients. We don’t offer only one type of service, such as mediation or facilitation, but rather a whole spectrum of services. Consumers don’t often research our services before they find themselves in conflict, and when you’re in conflict, you may find it difficult to take the time to consider your options. We take pride in our understanding of the field and our ability to educate prospective clients on our products, as well as when other options, such as the legal system, might be most appropriate. We will explain your options and allow you to make a more informed decision about what is right for you in your situation.