You’ve done it! It has taken quite a bit of work, but you have figured out how to work with all the members of your cognitively diverse team. Some were certainly easier to figure out than others, but it was well worth the effort. Yet somehow, there are still team conflicts! The relationship you have with each member is solid…but they can’t seem to get along with each other. It looks like there is another leg to this journey.

Sandy wants to focus on the big picture and what the project could lead to and is frustrated when Bob refuses to talk about that until they figure out the next few steps. Aria and Talia can’t agree on the priorities for the project they co-lead. Everyone is mad at Vera because they think she is rude. Telling them to “be adults and work it out” seems to make things worse somehow. It feels like you are back to the drawing board.

When problems occur, we want to fix them

When two people can’t agree and progress is stalled, as managers, we want to step in and solve the problem. Figure out what the right answer is and make the decision. Sure, one of them won’t be happy with your answer, but the job of a manager is to make those tough decisions. At least progress will get back on track, so you set out to learn both sides of the argument and figure out which one is right.

The problem: They are both right – from their own legend on the map. Sandy knows that defining the big picture will impact the immediate steps to take. Bob knows that the five-year target is irrelevant if you can’t figure out the steps to actually get there. Neither approach is right or wrong. BOTH are necessary for the ultimate success of the project, but when each person can only see the map from their own legend, conflict is inevitable.

It’s so obvious to you that both perspectives have merit, why can’t they see it? I love the saying “it’s tough to read the label when you are inside the jar.” It paints a very clear picture of our inability to have perspective on a subject once we are deeply immersed in it. Without knowing it, we put on blinders. What we can see is our solution, and since it is correct, we stop bothering to look at other solutions. Very often, both parties have the same blinders on…what’s different, is which direction they are looking through the same blinders.

Why can’t they see the other perspective?

When another person challenges our views, our amygdala interprets that as a threat. The amygdala consists of 2 almond shaped clusters in the limbic system in our brain, which is also referred to as the “lizard brain.” That is the oldest most primal section of the brain responsible for our survival responses, including fear and aggression. When someone challenges our beliefs or point of view, it may not be a threat to our physical safety, but our amygdala can’t tell the difference. And the response to a threat, any threat, is hardwired into our systems.

When our brain senses any threat, blood flow decreases to the prefrontal cortex, where rational thought occurs, and is diverted to the areas responsible for ‘fight or flight.’ The two people who can’t agree aren’t being difficult on purpose, they are responding with the limbic system of their brain, which is estimated to be 300 million years old. You can’t fight that much evolution and win. But you can find ways to help people bypass it.

Outsmarting your own brain

When two people on your team can’t agree, the goal is not to get them to drop their own point of view or ‘change their mind.’ The only goal is for them to also see the other point of view. Once the people involved can see both points of view, rational discussion and problem solving can occur. Millions of years of evolution may make this a challenge, but we can learn to work with it.

Studies show that while the amygdala may highjack blood flow to the prefrontal cortex, it only does so for about six seconds. (for more details see article) After that, brain chemistry starts going back to normal. If a response to any stimulus can be delayed for more than six seconds, the odds of a rational response increase dramatically.

Have you ever heard the advice to “take a deep breath before responding” or to “count to ten?” That is excellent advice. That deep breath, or ten seconds, is enough for the fight or flight chemicals to start dissipating. The difficulty is that ‘taking a deep breath’ is a logical thing to do…at a time when you need to do it because you are not being logical. That’s quite a catch 22. People can learn to make that delay become a habit, but it takes a lot of work and practice.

Manager as mediator

The people on your team have probably not trained themselves to create that delay before responding. Most people struggle with it. The people on your team have one major advantage…. you. If they are unable to work things out on their own, it’s time for you to step in.

Steps to take when mediating a disagreement on your team

• Listen to both sides: Meet with each person individually and ask them to explain their perspective. Your goal is not to agree or disagree; your only goal is to understand where they are coming from. The main benefit is that you will be able to know when the other party understands this point of view. The other benefit is that the person now feels seen and heard, which helps make them more receptive going forward.
• Name the mismatch: After hearing both points of view, identify the different thinking styles at play and name them. “Sandy, you’re naturally focused on the big picture and where this could lead. Bob, you need the sequential steps locked down before discussing outcomes. Neither approach is wrong. In fact, both perspectives are necessary for success. The problem is you’re frustrating each other because you’re reading the same map with different legends.”
• Start a new dialogue: Get both parties together for a discussion on the topic. Set very clear ground rules on the ground rules. Some rules might include when a person can speak (no interrupting), only stating facts not assumptions and using “I statements” when explaining your own perspective. Knowing the individuals involved will inform you which rules you should implement.
• Control the flow of conversation: It’s not enough to enforce the rule of not interrupting. You also need to create a buffer of at least six seconds before a response is made. You can make a formal rule that no response can be made until time has passed or until you ask for it, or you can be less formal and jump in before a response is made.
• Require paraphrasing: My favorite technique is to require paraphrasing what the last person said before responding. “Tell me what you just heard them say” is powerful for two reasons. The response will take more than six seconds, and the interpretation is a cognitive task, which engages the prefrontal cortex. You are already forcing them to use the logical part of their brain, in effect, getting it warmed up.

Next steps

Now that they understand each other’s point of view there needs to be a plan going forward. Don’t create a plan yourself and impose it on them. Instead, let them co-create working agreements together. When people design their own solutions, they’re far more likely to actually follow through..

Help them get specific. Vague agreements like “listen to other people’s opinions” aren’t going to cut it.

• ‘In planning meetings, we’ll spend the first 10 minutes on immediate next steps, then 10 minutes on long-term vision’
• ‘Before major decisions, we’ll document both the sequential requirements AND the strategic goals’
• ‘When we disagree, we’ll each state what the other person’s concern is before arguing our own position’

Get these agreements in writing. Review them before your next few interactions until following the plan becomes second nature.

When should you get involved?

If you have highly competent people on your team, it may feel like they should be able to resolve things themselves. When an important project is being delayed by what feels like a ridiculous conflict, jumping in sooner than later might feel the way to go. There is no one right answer, but here are some things to consider

• Is their disagreement impacting work? Disagreements don’t always get resolved, and that might be alright. If the people can “agree to disagree”, whether explicitly stated or just understood, let it go. If lack of resolution causing delays or other problems, address it sooner than later.
• Is the disagreement new? If two people had a disagreement, or even an argument and recently walked away from it, there is no need to get involved yet. Keep an eye on the situation and see what happens. If a day or more has passed and things aren’t getting better, or are getting worse, you might consider stepping in.
• Are they trying to work it out? As mentioned above, delaying responses in heated situations is a formidable challenge. Resolving conflict in general is a skill that is as important to learn as it is difficult. If you can see the two people working towards a resolution but it is going slower than you would like, consider letting them keep working. It may be frustrating right now, but the long-term investment in their development is well worth it.

The good news

Conflicts on your team can cause strife and halt productive work. It may not be pleasant to deal with, but it is actually a positive sign with a lot of potential upsides! Very often, this sort of conflict is caused by cognitive diversity in the makeup of your team. In the first few weeks of this series, we explored just how important and beneficial cognitive diversity on teams is. It not only leads to better and more creative solutions, it reduces mistakes and oversights. When people on your team are experiencing conflict, take a deep breath, lasting at least six seconds, and reframe the situation in your mind before deciding on your course of action.

Want to get an outside perspective yourself?

It is challenging for people in the middle of a conflict to be able to step back and see multiple perspectives. It can also be challenging for managers, who are so closely involved with the people on their teams, to be able to step outside and help them navigate the conflict. Very often, an outside perspective can help.

Whether it is having a conversation to discuss a particular situation or addressing the entire team to help everyone get a new perspective on conflict management, I am happy to help. Reach out here to schedule a conversation where we can discuss the best steps to take.