← All shows

Women at Work - How to Manage: Conflict

Duration 39:55 · Language en · Published Jun 12, 2023 · 5 highlights

Summary

本期节目围绕新任管理者如何准备、处理和化解职场冲突展开,并以一位管理者因焦虑而逃避绩效反馈的亲身经历切入。嘉宾将冲突分为任务、流程、地位和关系四类,强调这些类型常常交织在一起,因此首先识别分歧的本质有助于选择合适的应对方式。节目指出,无论一个人天生倾向于回避还是主动寻求冲突,都不应让本能反应替代对长期目标和具体情境的判断。对于回避者,直接反馈不应被理解为伤害或对抗,而可以被重新定义为帮助对方成长的善意行为;若情绪失控,则应暂停并在恢复理性后继续。面对资历更深、可能不尊重年轻管理者的下属,管理者应避免揣测动机,从具体行为出发,以真诚好奇的问题了解阻碍并明确责任。节目也讨论了管理朋友、调解下属矛盾以及夹在上级与团队之间的难题,主张优先赢得尊重而非讨人喜欢,坚持公平、边界清晰,并把决定与业务目标联系起来。最终的核心观点是,冲突本身并非负面事物,它可以促进个人、团队和组织进步;真正重要的是认识自己的倾向,并有意识地选择最适合当前情境的处理方式。

Highlights

  1. I'm not great with conflict. And so I wrote down everything I was gonna say to them. I practiced it. I sat in a room by myself, actually said it out loud... And when the time came to actually give that feedback to them, we had a one-on-one. I sat down in that one-on-one and I was ...

    我不擅长处理冲突,所以把要说的一切都写下来,反复练习,甚至独自在房间里大声说出来……可真正到了要反馈的一对一谈话时,我坐下来却想:不,我们不谈这个了。

    A painfully relatable failure of courage
  2. It's not harmful to have a difficult conversation. In fact, it's quite often the opposite. It's helpful. It's the kind thing to do to tell that person that they're not performing up to snuff.

    进行一场艰难的谈话并不是在伤害别人,事实上往往恰恰相反。它是有帮助的;告诉对方其表现尚未达标,才是一种善意。

    Reframes candor as an act of kindness
  3. The minute you are certain they're doing it because they disrespect you or they don't take you seriously or you're certain it's because of your age difference, there's no room to allow the dynamic to change. Like certainty is the death of these collaborative conversations.

    一旦你认定对方这样做是因为不尊重你、不把你当回事,或一定是年龄差异造成的,这段互动就再也没有改变的空间。确信无疑,是协作式对话的死亡。

    A memorable warning against assumed motives
  4. Part of your job is collaboration. Sorting this out is your job. It's not my job. It's your job. Actually, as I say that, I want to step back because one of the things you first want to do is make sure you haven't inadvertently created the conflict by not being clear about expect ...

    协作是你工作的一部分,解决这件事是你的职责,不是我的职责。不过在这么说之前,管理者首先要确认:是否因为没有明确期望、设置了彼此竞争的目标,或助长了不健康的竞争,而无意中制造了这场冲突。

    Balances accountability with managerial self-scrutiny
  5. The research shows that gossip most negatively reflects not on the topic, the subject of the gossip, but the gossiper... You have a lot of information that feels like power and it is power, but if you use that to try to bond with your direct reports or get them to like you, you g ...

    研究表明,流言蜚语最损害的并不是被议论的人,而是传播流言的人……掌握大量信息会让人感到有权力,而那确实是一种权力;但如果你用它来拉近与下属的关系或换取他们的喜欢,就必须反思这种做法。

    Surprising research with immediate leadership relevance
Full transcript

All right, Kelsey, what was one of the most memorable conflicts you had when you were managing people? There are so many that I can think of. I think the one that comes to mind most vividly, when I first started managing people, I had a direct report who was underperforming in different ways. They weren't really completing tasks that I was giving them, the tasks that they did complete.

weren't completed the way that I wanted to. And, you know, my first instinct was like, oh, maybe I just should not give them more tasks. I'll just do it all myself. I know how to do it. It's going to be great. And I challenged that. So I'm proud of myself for that, that part of the story. I challenged that and said, you know what? No, this is a learning experience for this person. It's a learning experience for me. I'm going to have a talk with them, and I'm going to confront them about their underperformance.

I'm a pretty anxious person about this stuff. I'm not great with conflict. And so I wrote down everything I was gonna say to them. I practiced it. I sat in a room by myself, actually said it out loud, which can be really weird. And when the time came to actually give that feedback to them, we had a one-on-one. I sat down in that one-on-one and I was like, nope, we're not doing this.

I just panicked and was like, we're just gonna have a nice pleasant one-on-one and then we're gonna go our separate ways and go sit back at our desks and do what we need to do. And at the time it felt great. I was like, oh, I love that I didn't have to just confront this person and give that negative feedback. And obviously over time I was like, okay, I'm gonna have to have this conversation eventually. And I don't know, it just sticks out in my head because it was really a turning point for me in terms of...

Why did I shy away from that when I knew it was good for me and I knew it was good for that person? Yeah, and yeah, I have a lot of things to say Go forward Amy G One is I think some people would say was that even a conflict right? I would define it as a conflict because I think of a conflict as anytime you and another person's needs wants desires are not aligned So it may be an unspoken conflict. It may be an all-out fight. More likely it's probably an exchange of tense conversations, words. So I would define that as a conflict. But then I think the other question is like, what kind of conflict? I find it helpful to categorize conflicts because that helps you figure out how to actually address them. And it sounds like...

What you're having is what I'd call a process conflict. So like, how do you actually get something done? So maybe you agree on the goal. Your goal is to finish these three projects by x date. But the question is, how are you going to do that? Are you going to do that by taking them all on at the same time by sequencing them? Right. So that might have been the disagreement between you and your direct report. And then once you sort of know what you're disagreeing about, you have to decide what to do about it. And I also think there are four sort of distinct approaches to handling. One is to ignore it, which is what you chose to do. We can discuss if that was the right choice. Two, to address it directly. That's where you sit down and hash it out. You know, three, you address it indirectly. You might use stories, metaphors. You might go through an intermediary to help you resolve it. And then the fourth, which is the last resort option is to just bail altogether on the relationship. So that would have been...

In this case, you firing the person, are you quitting your job? Which didn't sound like a reasonable response. I'm glad you didn't use it. Most often it's not a reasonable response. Right. All right, Amy, that is exactly why we're so grateful you're here for this conversation. You know how I feel about conflict. Yeah, not your favorite. Noop. Okay, but you don't avoid it. No, I cannot avoid it. Yeah, that's your job as a manager. That's right. I actually read that managers spend like 40% of their time resolving misunderstandings and interpersonal problems. Yeah. Sometimes it feels like 140%. You're listening to Women at Work from Harvard Business Review. I'm Amy Bernstein. I'm Amy Gallo. And I'm Kelsey Alpeo. Amy G, I'm also so grateful you're here to guide us through how to prepare for, manage, and resolve conflict as a new manager. Between my questions and the questions our audience has sent in, we have a lot to cover.

Before we get to the specific questions Amy G let's let's cover the fundamentals like preparing for conflict before it happens Earlier you were talking about what process conflict is and then you said there were other types Mm-hmm. What are they? Yeah, I mean I think it's helpful to know like just a little bit about them So like task conflict which is a disagreement over the goal what we're trying to achieve There are status conflicts which are a disagreement over who gets to make the call, who's in charge, who has authority and then there are relationship conflicts and those are where it's personal. The important thing to know about the four types is that they're not mutually exclusive so it's not like I have a nice tidy task conflict. I can just clean that up. It's more often a hot mess of all.

And you might disagree about the process and realize you actually disagree about the objective. And then you disagree about who gets to make the call about the objective. And then you start exchanging snarky emails and it becomes personal. So, yeah. And that's a great day. That's just two emails. As you lay these all out, I just want to leave the room because I'm so conflict avoidant.

I'm wondering what do conflict of orders like me need to know about our natural tendency to shy away from disagreements. Like I cared so much about harmony and being liked by my team that I just, I wanted to keep the status quo even though I knew it wasn't working. Yeah. I love the image of you Kelsey like skipping back to your desk like that one on one.

Yeah, when you did nothing you set out to do. That's a classic avoider behavior of just being like, oh, I'm so glad it's not, that everything's okay. I want to be clear, in my book, HBO Guide to Deal and Conflict, I divide people into two categories, conflict seekers and conflict avoiders, but it's really more of a spectrum, and it will depend, like Amy B, you might identify as someone who likes to avoid conflict, but you lean into the seeker style when you need to. So you can do it. And I actually think of you as someone who's not afraid to say exactly what she means, even if it ruffles a few feathers. And that's more of a seeker style. But avoiders, I think one of the things to know is that you're valuing something that's really important. You're valuing relationships and harmony, like you said. You're not valuing directness and honesty maybe as much. And that's okay. Like it's just a choice you're making.

But you have to watch out that you don't default to that. There's going to be the immediate thing you want to do because it feels most comfortable or it feels easy or it feels right. And really, you have to think a little bit further ahead. In one month, next week, six months is the choice I'm making about how to deal with this going to get me the results I want to see. Because you skipping back to your desk did not help you or that director report. Right. And so.

really if you think about okay, what's the short-term discomfort I have to experience in order to achieve the long-term goal that I really want, which of course requires you to be clear about what the goal is. Right, and I think before I became a manager it was so much easier to just lean into being a conflict of order as opposed to a seeker and then it was like I was thrown into this pit of conflict and now all of a sudden it was like I had to seek it and I was like, no, thank you. Well, and I think a lot of people who are more senior in their career, what I hear them say is, well, my natural style is to avoid if I do value relationships and harmony, but I've had to learn to be a seeker. I've had to learn to be direct enough. Okay, so I just want to say that you can be a seeker, which I hear as a non-avoider and care a lot about relationships. But I wonder, Amy G,

What tendencies do conflict seekers need to be aware of in themselves? Yeah, I mean I think of the conflict seekers as the people who like lean in when the tension gets high in a room like they might Put their elbows on the table sort of get a little excited. They stir the pot They're willing to just say it like it is One of the things you have to watch out for is it can feel like bulldozing especially to avoiders and if you have an avoider who's really genuinely afraid of conflict because they think it's antithetical to having positive relationships, which is an assumption we should challenge, but if you have someone who's deeply afraid and you start stirring the pot, they're just gonna roll over, right? They're just gonna back up or you might get them on the defensive and then you're not gonna have a productive conversation. So I think seekers really have to watch that they're not dominating the conversation, that they're not just doing it for sport and that sometimes

letting the conversation or the conflict go is the right thing to do. So there are options, right? Yes. And it sounds as if different contexts, different situations present different options for you, right? Yes. And what you want to make sure you don't do is let your default response to conflict determine what option you've, right? Like Kelsey's deep discomfort with conflict allowed her to just completely let go of that difficult conversation.

And so you have to challenge, okay, I know what my default is. I know I tend to avoid. I know I tend to seek whatever it is and then ask yourself, okay, but what's the best thing for this situation keeping in mind that goal, right? What is my goal here? Is it to help my direct report perform at their best? Is it to get this project done on time? Is it to get out of this meeting because I'm losing my mind? Like what is it exactly that you need?

to achieve and then decide what the right approach is to lead to that outcome. Now, you might get it wrong, right? You might decide, well, you know what, I'm gonna let it go. And then the conflict gets worse. And so it's like, okay, no, I have to take a more direct approach. So, you know, in the story, I told, I knew it was the right thing to do to approach this person, but I didn't get to the point where I challenged my avoidance. So say I was able to challenge that and seek it out.

You have to just keep challenging yourself again and again throughout that conversation. How do you do that? It's such a good point because they're going to be like 100 moments in that difficult conversation where you're going to want to default to your avoid your style. So part of it is also reframing like is this a confrontation you use? Like I have to confront them, right? Is it a confrontation? It sounds like a conversation about their performance in which you're trying to help them, right? And I think partly what avoiders often think is that by being direct, by raising the difficult conversation, they're hurting someone. And I think Amy, maybe you were alluding to this earlier. It's not harmful to have a difficult conversation. In fact, it's quite often the opposite. It's helpful. It's the kind thing to do to tell that person that they're not performing up to snuff, right? Right. And so I think you have to

reframe it for yourself and then notice your natural tendency. And it may be like you get two steps in and the next conversation in bail. Let's get back to your desk, right? But then next time you get four steps in and I think anytime you're trying to build a skill is you make the mistake because you will make the mistake and then ask yourself, what would I have done differently if I was in a better frame of mind? Okay, let me try that next time. Try that next time you make a mistake again. But hopefully it'll be a different kind of mistake learned from that.

So I think you're right, like I can envision myself getting to the second step, the third step of this conversation and just still shutting down, still not being able to move forward, still skipping back to my desk, like everything's great. What should you do if you find yourself in the middle of that conversation and you just start shutting down? Yeah. All of the neuroscience shows that we are terrible at these types of conversations that require empathy, emotional self-control, when we are shut down, right? When we go into what they often call amygdala hijack, our brains end up protecting us, not actually doing the thing we need to do, which is often caring about another person or delivering a message clearly. So if you were shut down, don't trudge ahead, right? Give yourself a moment and it might be the more skilled among us might need 30 seconds to take a deep breath, reorient themselves, remind themselves of the focus,

If you're new at this, it might be better to take a break and say, you know what, this conversation is really important. I wanna make sure that we're both in the right frame of mind to have it. Let's take a break, come back to it tomorrow. Or you might even say, you know what, let's pause. I'm gonna go get a glass of water. Do you wanna come with me to get one? Just sort of switch things up to give yourself a moment and take the break you've bought yourself to reflect on, okay, where did I get tripped up? Why did I start melting down?

Fair enough, but why did that happen? What can I do differently to prevent that? And then come back to it. So now that we've gone over some of the most common causes of conflict and our natural tendencies and options, let's talk a little bit more about conflict with direct reports. Great. We received several anecdotes from listeners who are new to management and are relatively young.

they've had to deal with more experienced direct reports who wouldn't listen to them. So how do we handle that kind of conflict, Amy G? First of all, help us categorize it. Yeah, I mean, I think having someone who's not listening to you is probably a status conflict, right? Like who gets to actually decide who's gonna do what or who gets to speak up or who gets the credit. The challenge is...

My instinct my strong instinct is that in most situations this is an issue of age bias Or another type of bias especially if you're a young woman there might be gender bias, right? The problem is knowing that does not help you necessarily address it more efficiently or effectively because You're then in your head like this person doesn't like me because I'm a woman. They don't like me because I'm young I don't think it's helpful. Well, it does help you separate yourself from the source of the conflict. Correct. This is not about me, right? And I think in this specific situation is a really important phrase and reminder, right? This isn't about me. This is about them. This is about their bias. This is about... And you're not gonna address all of that. Instead, you need to address what's actually happening. And I would start really small. Like what is one thing they didn't listen to you about that you need them to listen to you about? Instead of...

going into sort of generalizations like they don't respect me they're never going to listen but you might have all those feelings and they might be really valid and they might be true but I think that you really need to focus on what is it in that moment you actually need to get them to do so let's just say you gave them a project they're like yeah yeah i'll do it and they just still haven't done it and you come back to them well how's that project going yeah yeah i'll get to it when they still haven't done it now you're having status conflict, but there's also a task conflict. Do they understand the goal? Do they understand how they should do the project? Can you set a short-term milestone that they actually need to achieve rather than the whole thing and expecting them to chunk it up themselves? And I mean, I think you want to also make clear what's going on, right? I've asked you three times about this project and you're not making progress. What's going on? Right? Like a very neutral question, which is going to feel like a confrontation, but

It's important that they actually follow through on what they do, and it's your job as a manager to hold them accountable to doing that. I don't know, is that something you can imagine yourself doing? I like that question specifically because it doesn't feel too scary to ask it, but it gets to the bottom of what's going on. Yes. And you can't presume you know what's going on, because I think that's the danger is you might presume it's age bias or gender bias, or you might presume they're lazy or They're insubordinate. I don't you know whatever but the minute you start telling them why they're doing something You've totally offended them right no one likes to be told why they're doing something You're never gonna get it right so instead ask them what's going on? Yeah, I mean asking someone in a genuinely inquisitive way What's getting between you and finishing this task? Gives them a chance to give you an honest answer. Yeah, and it's

It's a bit of a Jedi mind trick you have to do because that you have to have that genuine curiosity. The minute you are certain they're doing it because they disrespect you or they don't take you seriously or you're certain it's because of your age difference. There's no room to allow the dynamic to change. Like certainty is the death of these collaborative conversations. So you have to find a way to genuinely be curious about what's actually going on. Yeah, and imputing motive is almost always going to get you on the wrong track, I think. There's research. I think it was Lindy Greer at Michigan who looked at what happens when you assign people feelings. Like, I know you're upset or you must be sad. And people almost universally get it wrong. And so we have to be careful. We don't assign people these emotions and tensions because it's just not...

Helpful and imagine being assigned to feeling. Oh, it feels awful. That's terrible. It's so condescending. Yes. Yeah, even if they're right. It sounds wrong. Yeah Well, it sounds like you're being talked to like a toddler use your words You should use your words all right, what else have we got?

So one question I had for you and again, I'm talking about one of the biggest mistakes I made when I first became a manager I Wanted to be the cool boss so bad like I wanted all of my direct reports to want to be best friends with me and for us to go out for drinks afterwards and obviously there's a lot of issues that come with that one of them being when it came time to Actually sit down with them and say hey, I'm the boss here like we have to have this conversation It made it so much harder to bridge that gap. So how can you handle conflict with a direct report or colleague that you see as a friend? Before you even get to that point, as a manager or as a new manager, you really have to focus on being respected, not liked. Being the cool boss is great. It's nice if they like you, but that's not your main function. You need them to respect you. You need them to believe you have their...

their best interests at heart, right? You need to be warm. I'm not saying you can't be friendly, but your priority is being respected and conveying what you need to convey for them. That said, I think you can be friends with people you manage. I just think you have to be always be clear about what hat you're wearing. In fact, you both know when I started at HBR, one of the people I've reported into was a very good friend of mine and it was very nerve-wracking to think about this exact scenario of like, what happens if I mess something up? And we would start each conversation saying, what kind of conversation is this? Like, is this a work conversation? Is this a friend conversation? What hat are you wearing? Like, I'm wearing my hat as your boss. I'm wearing my hat as your friend. And I think you would want to lay that out with your direct reports ahead of time, especially if you start to become friends. I think a lot of what happens with new managers is they've been peers.

With someone who now they're promoted to manage and they did have a friendly relationship. So it's helpful to have a conversation At the beginning and say the dynamic has changed. I think it's important we acknowledge that what I want to do is make sure that I'm clear about what hat I'm wearing and I want you to Understand that there's things I might not be able to tell you there's things I might have to say to you that as your friend I wouldn't want to but as your manager I have to and just making that clear up front so you sort of contracted ahead of time. Yeah. Something you just said seems so important. I just want to underscore it, which is that you have to know where the boundaries are. Yeah. Because if you're not clear on them, the friend slash report isn't going to be clear on either. They're going to follow your lead. Exactly. I think there's another issue that comes up, which is the issue of fairness. So let's say you do tell your friend slash direct report something that you haven't told others and that gets out.

Now you're going to be seen as an unfair boss. Talk about conflict. You're now going to be dealing with a team that doesn't trust you, that thinks you play favorites. You know why? Because you just played favorites. Correct. When you're navigating those relationships, I think there's two principles. Respect over likability and equity and fairness are premier, right? You really have to make sure you prioritize those. And I think that part of the equity and fairness piece is making sure that you're always really clear about what's guiding your decision making.

the intention, right? Starting everything. My intention with this is to. Having that conversation with your new direct report about having to be clear about what hat you're wearing might feel uncomfortable, but if you say my intention here is to make sure this relationship continues as smoothly as possible and I do my best as your manager because I want to do right by you. Yeah. The one time I managed and it was very short lived.

I definitely wanted to be the cool boss, and I did everything I could to make this person like me. And then the way I totally ruined it was then my boss told me to give her, and I think I might have shared this story on a previous episode, but as my boss told me to give her feedback about something I actually didn't think needed feedback, it was about her taking time off. And I was like, she's getting her job done. I don't care how much time she's taking off. I don't care if she's calling in sick. And I...

couldn't digest the feedback and deliver it my own way. I just decided I had to do exactly what my boss said. I delivered it with no concern for the direct report, who I also considered my friend. And it was just, it was a mess. She just started sobbing. Like it was terrible. It was terrible. Exactly. I will tell you, this is before I started doing all this work. I think I do it a little bit better this time. Let's talk about managing conflict among direct reports.

What should you do if two of your direct reports are in conflict with each other? When is it your job to mediate that situation and when is it not? Yeah, you know you want the conflict to be resolved at the lowest possible level so if you can Help them resolve the conflict as opposed to stepping in with authority or direction It's gonna go much better over the long run because now hopefully they've figured out they can resolve their own conflicts And you're not gonna be required to step in all the time so it's your job not to necessarily intervene, but it's your job to make sure everyone can do their job. It's like one of the main jobs as managers. So if this conflict is getting in the way of them doing their job, yeah, you have responsibility to do something about it. And I would encourage coaching first, maybe separately, right? Having a conversation with each of them, asking them to see the other person's perspective, you know, what's going on? What do you think's motivating them? Why do you think they've done what they did?

and maybe challenging their viewpoint if it's a little bit biased or one-sided in a gentle way. And then getting them to articulate what's actually at stake. You can talk about the four types of conflict. What type of conflict is it? Asking them to articulate their goal and then get them to decide on how they want to proceed. And then you can do that with the other side too. Eventually you may need to sit down with both of them if they can't do it. And I think one of the things you need to make explicit is that part of your job is collaboration. None of us have a job that doesn't require that. So part of your job is collaboration. Sorting this out is your job. It's not my job. It's your job. Actually, as I say that, I want to step back because one of the things you first want to do is make sure you haven't inadvertently created the conflict by not being clear about expectations, by setting up competing goals, by fostering unhealthy competition. Maybe you've done something you can change that would

Diffuse the conflict but once you've sort of Sorted out your part in it then I think it's on them to really sort out along with your coaching. Mm-hmm. How have you done it Amy B? Well if one person comes to me complaining about the other I have learned because I've made the mistake to Say to that person I need to get the other side and then to get the other side. First of all, when you say to someone, I'm going to get the other side. The story sometimes shifts just a little bit. I don't think people intentionally lie. Nope. But I do think people will make their case. Yeah. And then I do get the other side. And then, you know, I have said, listen, do you want me to adjudicate this? Or do you guys want to work this out knowing that I know what's going on? And sometimes what you have to do is get underneath the bone of contention, if you will, you know, you have to sort of

Find out what's really going on here. What's pissing you off? Yeah, what do you think that is gonna happen? What are you afraid of here? Yeah, I think about that as like the negotiation term of interests, right? Not the position. They'll show up with their position. I want X. He won't do this. But what's the interest? What's the underlying reason why they want that? What's the underlying reason they can't get along and then try to address that not negotiate between their positions, right?

Should we talk now about competing interests? Yeah, for sure. Yes. So what if your boss wants something different for your direct report than you do? We have a listener, Jen, who shared an experience with us about this. Let's hear from her. The company had a directive that they really wanted people to either do strategy or execution. So that impacted two of the people reporting to me. Instead of them both doing projects and to end I had to have one of them start doing just strategy one start doing just execution not what they signed up for frankly when they applied for their roles I tried negotiating for that roles and responsibilities change to not happen for my team because I felt like things were working so well that this change wouldn't be good but I was not able to make that happen so

Once my manager let me know that now we need to move forward with the way the direction has been given, then I just had to do that and figure out a way to make that work for my team. These are my least favorite types of conflict because you're having a conflict both ways. You're having a conflict with your boss and with your direct report. And I think the temptation goes two ways. One, you might try to just please your boss and say, okay, fine, I'll have the conflict with my direct report, tell them they have to work on this even though I don't believe it. Or the temptation is to just advocate for your direct report at all costs. Neither I think is the right approach. Part of being a manager is trying to please all of these stakeholders and while still keeping a focus on your goals and your targets. So I think for someone like Jen who's sort of stuck in the middle.

First of all, I would feel out what you think is the right thing. Consider both their perspectives or all of their perspectives. It might be even more people involved. And then consider what you think is the best for the work you're trying to achieve. And then go back and say, okay, that means I need to advocate to my boss to change their mind and let me give them my direct report. Maybe there's a compromise that feels like the right thing. Or maybe it's that I have to deliver the news to my direct report that You know, I actually agree with the higher ups about what you should be focused on. I know it's not what we agreed on or I know it's not your favorite thing, but here's why I feel it's important. And I think the key is to really always tie it back to the business goals. What are you actually trying to achieve? Why you've made that decision and then deliver it clearly. I think the worst thing you can do is to let that stew of conflicts just get deeper and murkier. And if you can be clear about what you want,

of what you think is best and then negotiate on each side of that, I think you're better off. I think one of the worst things, and I can tell you I've been very tempted to do this myself, is to just be like, oh, boss, can you talk to Director Port? Great, hey, you handle it, right? Because then you look powerless. Yeah. As I was looking at this question, I would ask, I would go back to my boss if I were in this situation and ask why. What's behind this decision?

Because I do want to buy into it, right? Or if I don't agree with it, I want to disagree with it on the merits, right? And there is a certain amount of mediation involved, saying to your direct report, listen, I'm getting some pressure to switch around the way we're doing things. Here's what the boss is saying. Before we do this, I'm going to go investigate. I mean, there's a lot of transparency involved here.

Investigate ask the question have the conversation with your boss and where you say I'd love to understand why you're asking for this change Here's where my resistance is coming from and just help me Understand so I can explain it in a way that is persuasive. Mmm. I love that help me understand so I can explain it because you may not get There's a satisfying answer and you your direct report may still be unhappy with the decision But at least you've understood it fully to your capacity You've been made clear what the intention behind the decision is and the question may be to your direct report All right, I know you're not happy with this. I think in an ideal world I might have made a different choice, but let's talk together how we can make this work The other thing I would do is if I really had doubts and because I really think my job is to

advance the interests of the organization, is to say to my boss, how about if we do this, we'll give it six weeks or six months, and then let's check in. You have to be open-minded. But getting directives without any explanation kind of violates a basic rule of management, right? Yes, and we have to recognize that that sometimes happens. It happens, but we're not powerless. We can go back and say, just help me understand.

And then, I mean, I'm thinking of the worst case scenarios of your manager saying, well, because that was the decision. Or even worse, I don't know. The guy above made me that decision. I don't know. The woman above him made that decision. I, you know, like- Yeah. I don't know. I would not be happy if my boss said- Because so and so made. Because he made me. Right. I mean, you could not say that with any kind of pride. No. Come on. But as I hear you talk, this was one of the- most common forms of conflict I feel like I encountered as a new manager. And my tactic was always to be like, well, that's what the boss said. So that was my approach. So to hear you kind of lay that out is like, one of the worst possible things you could do. It's kind of funny to reflect. But what made you do that? I think what made me do, I mean, it comes back to wanting to avoid that conflict and being able to blame somebody else was the ultimate way to avoid conflict. Because

It's like, you can be mad. This is a bad situation, but you know, it's not my fault. We're still, we're still BFFs. We're still going to go have drinks after work and we'll all talk about how much like we're mad at like the higher ups for doing what they did. And it was a way to like bond with my director ports. And it was a way for me to not have to confront this thing that obviously I struggle with a lot. So. Yeah. So when you're taking down management over Margarita.

at what point do you realize, well, wait a second, I'm management now. I'm taking down myself. Well, it's a perfect example, Kelsey, of prioritizing likeability over respect. You think in the moment they respect you because you're in on it with them. But the minute you have to tell them to do something, they're like, what? You're one of us. Exactly. We were taking down management over our margaritas. And more to the point, I don't know why I'm asking you to do this.

Isn't going to inspire a whole lot of respect, right? Definitely not. No, or motivation. Oh hell no, right? But that's a great way to get someone to give the least amount of effort to just get something done. Right, yeah. And to be fair, sometimes you say this is just a box we have to check because this is what's required. We all have been in that position, like just check the box. Hopefully that's not a major part of their job. Right, but you have to choose your battles and you say to your team We have to choose our battle since this is not the battle we're choosing. Yeah, and here's why yeah, but you always have to go into the here's why yes, yes Oh, let's talk about another question. We got from a listener crystal She asks how can you be open and honest with your team while shielding them from the office politics going on around and above you? You want to help your team understand how the organization works right you want to help them navigate

the informal politics, but you don't need to give them the play-by-play of the manager's meeting. No. The other thing is, you can't coddle people. You get three people in a room, you're gonna have politics, right? So the shielding piece, I've been chewing on the whole idea of shielding people from politics. I mean, the blow-by blows, the sharing of nasty little details that probably not necessary. But people really shouldn't think that management leadership and teamwork is frictionless. Correct. I love the way you said that, Amy, because you want to be sure they understand that conflict is normal. And any decision is going to involve trade-offs. Sometimes the right thing to do is to be really transparent about the trade-offs. We know that if we do X,

We were going to take a little hit over here on Y. But we decided that it's more important to do X. And we made this decision because this was the information we had. And in sharing the rationale, you're bringing people on board, right? If other information comes to light, you would want your team to surface that, right? Yes.

And to say, here's the decision, go off and do it instead of saying, hey, there was a great debate at the manager's team about wanting to do this and wanting to do this. Some folks felt this way, other folks felt this way based on this conversation, which to be fair got heated at times, but we came to a good conclusion, we're going to do this. If you find out in the process of carrying that out, that there's actually more data that would inform this trade-off we made, let me know. I think of this sort of Sharing of office politics is sharing of gossip, which is that the research shows that gossip most negatively reflects Not on the topic the subject of the gossip but the gossiper of course you sit there going Oh, so and you know so-and-so's department eight so-and-so And it makes you look bad of course. It doesn't make them look bad This connects back to Kelsey's question about the cool boss is you have a lot of information That feels like power and it is power, but if you use that to try to

Bond with your direct reports or get them to like you or you sort of exchange It's becomes transactional like I'm gonna give you this information because you think it'll make them perform better for you or be more motivated You got a question that yeah Okay, I know we need to wrap up Kelsey I'm dying to know because you started this by talking about how much you hate conflict how avoidant you are mm-hmm has this helped at all It has I I came into this episode saying Amy G is gonna come in here and absolutely destroy me I was just so ready because I I know I'm bad at this I'm very self-aware of that but I I do feel differently and I think the reason this has helped me is because I've always treated conflict as something super negative something to avoid at all costs and I think hearing you both speak

you speak about conflict from a place of it's actually there to help you. It's actually there to help everyone on your team. It's actually there to help your organization. And that's just not a way that I ever thought about it. I always took the negative approach to it. And so coming away from this, I think my mindset around it is just very different. And I appreciate that a lot. Yeah. And just remember that Conflict of voiders are not the ones doing it wrong like I think in our culture we do value the sort of directness and sitting down hashing it out But addressing every single conflict with complete directness and honesty is not the right solution. Oh my god Who wants to be with that person? So I don't want the conflict of voiders who may be chose to listen to this episode because they're like I need to get better at this to feel like they're doing it all wrong Again, no one's doing it right. It's just a matter of recognizing what your instincts are

and trying to decide, do I follow those instincts because it's the right thing for this situation, or do I need to go against them because it's the right thing for this situation? Well, I look forward to hearing about your next conflict. You'll be the first person I message. Maybe it's our conflict. Maybe we're going to have a conflict. Oh, gosh. I mean, I'm like, I hope not, but we can handle it. I feel confident now. We can. Yeah. And that's our show. I'm Amy Bernstein. I'm Amy Gallo.

And I'm Kelsey Alpeo. HBR has more podcasts to help you manage yourself, your team, and your organization. Find them at hbr.org slash podcasts or search HBR in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen. Women at Work's editorial and production team is Amanda Cursey, Maureen Hoek, Tina Toby Mack, Rob Eckhart, Erica Truxler, Ian Fox, and Hannah Bates. Robin Moore composed this theme music.

Thanks for listening. Our inbox is always open. Women at work at hbr.org. And Amy G wrote the book on conflict. In fact, she wrote two books on conflict. The HBR guide to dealing with conflict and her latest Getting Along, both of which you can find at store.hbr.org on Amazon or wherever you buy books.

Delete this episode?

This removes the episode page and its saved audio from this library.