Conflict
One of the great puzzles in human life, I find, is the similarity between what happens during the good times of our lives, and what happens during the bad times.
It is possible to feel physically unwell, or directionless, or beset by problems - and yet to feel totally OK about it. Life can have the features of “bad times’, and there is still somehow an ease or joy to things. In particular, I have found that when exiting periods of depression, many of the issues which seemed to be getting me down are often still just as much of a problem as they were before, but I am no longer bothered by them. They are problems but no longer PROBLEMS. In the un-depressed state, it seems like I can either act on them or live with them. Problems are workable, in a way that PROBLEMS are not.
There’s a bit of a parallel to this for organisations, I think. There can be many superficial similarities between an organisation whose culture is in a good state and a bad state. Conflict, in particular, can be present in all organisations - but just as in personal life there is conflict, and there is CONFLICT.1
In organisations, it is healthy to disagree about work.
Those sort of disagreements boil down to debates about questions like:
“What is the problem we are solving?”
“What is the best way to solve it?”
“Is this widget good enough to send out to a customer?”
“How does this affect our customers?”
It is productive to want to challenge each other over these sorts of issues. Having opinions about them is a sign that people care about the things you make as an organisation (and as I wrote last time, caring about the work is how we create value and impact for our customers).
But debating these questions can look a lot like conflict.
If you were to peek in to another organisation’s Slack, you might see a lot of vigorous back and forth, a lot of what appears to be dissent about leadership decisions.2 But these may not be signs of an organisation in trouble.
For instance, when we ask “how does this affect our customers”, if we have more than one customer base, or different teams interact with customers in different ways, they are likely to disagree with each other pretty consistently. This can look like “he said, she said” on the surface.
Or, when senior leaders make big decisions about strategy and purpose, there might be a tide of feedback, of people asking “why?” Or expressing their reservations about possible risk and downsides. The questions can come from a place of care, and the opinions can all be valuable feedback to help stress test the decision. This kind of open discussion does not necessarily reflect a lack of respect for the CEO or their decision-making authority.
So, what is it that distinguishes the good from the bad, if they look so similar at first glance?
Well… one thing is: trust.
When there is trust, conflict can be valuable. And more than valuable, it can be a necessary step towards a shared commitment. I’ll explore more about that in my next post.
If you’re wondering: how do you build trust? In a way this whole blog presents my view of ways to build trust. I think operations (and organisation building) can contribute to building trust by supporting proactive relationship building, and giving people a functional workplace where they can do their best work. So just do something!
Actually that parallel probably exists in personal life too. Some couple relationships involve a lot of disagreement, but are loving and supportive, and are overall a source of emotional strength. But constant arguments can also be a sign of a relationship that isn’t working. You have to go beyond the surface to find out which applies.
On the subject of Slack, this week I’ve been listening again to the BBC audio series “Helen Lewis Has Left The Chat”. The episode “Several People Are Typing”, covers the rise of instant messaging at work and is well worth your time.