Conflicts are a part of life and a learning experience for teams. Some conflicts are visible upfront and seem to require immediate action while others are not noticed or addressed until it’s too late.Reflect on two conflicts in your past (relationship, task, or process)—one visible that you addressed and one you chose not to address or did not notice at the time.
Consider the following questions for both conflicts:
What type of conflict were each, and why did each take place?
Describe the outcomes of the two conflicts. Explain what you learned from them.
Apply the Wageman and Donnenfelds’ conflict intervention model to the two conflicts. What would be the outcome of the application?
Compare the conflicts. How do they compare relative to the thought processes used in regard to them? What made you deal with one and not the other?
How would you have handled them differently if you had possessed your current knowledge base?
Full Answer Section
- Diagnosis: We identified the conflict as a task conflict, stemming from differences in approach and priorities.
- Intervention: We chose a collaborative approach, focusing on finding a mutually beneficial solution.
- Evaluation: The intervention was successful in resolving the conflict and improving team cohesion.
Conflict 2: An Invisible, Unaddressed Process Conflict
Type of Conflict: Process Conflict Cause: A misunderstanding about roles and responsibilities within a group project.
Outcome: The conflict was not explicitly addressed, leading to frustration, resentment, and a decline in team performance.
Wageman and Donnenfelds' Intervention Model:
- Diagnosis: Recognizing the conflict as a process conflict, stemming from unclear roles and expectations.
- Intervention: A collaborative approach could have been used to clarify roles, establish expectations, and develop a shared understanding of the project goals.
- Evaluation: Due to the lack of intervention, the conflict negatively impacted the team's dynamics and the quality of the final product.
Comparing the Two Conflicts
The first conflict was addressed because it was visible and disruptive. Both parties recognized the need to resolve the issue to maintain a productive working relationship. The second conflict, being less obvious, was not acknowledged or addressed, leading to negative consequences.
Learning from the Past
If I had possessed my current knowledge base, I would have handled the second conflict differently. I would have been more proactive in identifying and addressing the underlying issues, such as unclear roles and expectations. By applying the principles of effective communication and conflict resolution, I could have prevented the conflict from escalating and negatively impacting the team.
In both cases, I would have benefited from using a more structured approach to conflict resolution, such as the one outlined by Wageman and Donnenfelds. By systematically diagnosing the conflict, selecting an appropriate intervention strategy, and evaluating the outcomes, I could have achieved more positive results.
Sample Answer
Conflict 1: A Visible, Addressed Task Conflict
Type of Conflict: Task Conflict Cause: A disagreement about the best approach to a project. My teammate and I had different ideas about how to allocate resources and prioritize tasks.
Outcome: Initially, the conflict led to frustration and inefficiency. However, we eventually addressed the issue through open communication and compromise. We discussed our differing perspectives and found a solution that satisfied both of us.