In this era of budget shortfalls, when we are faced with increasing demands for our services and diminishing dollars, we can get mired in “scarcity-thinking.” We think we must do more with less, guard what we have left, and choose among critical needs. This scarcity mindset is not limited to funding issues; it drives our decision-making processes and often is behind conflicts within our own agencies. But in a time of scarce resources (funding!), information is in great abundance! Although funding is indeed often in short supply, there remains one resource that is not only abundantly available but also renewable: communication!

We are in an information age; information and communication applications power our lives, jobs, and workplaces. Cable television, internet/email, cell phones, fax machines, etc., deliver an ever-increasing volume of information, communicating messages twenty-four hours a day. These communication devices, tools, and resources are available to help us manage our work and personal lives. Communication, the art of information sharing, is a potentially abundant resource that allows us to reach out to our teams within our agencies and to our customers and collaborators. The challenge is using communication effectively. The absence of a healthy exchange of information costs agencies effectiveness and can destroy a well-meaning program. This article explores the “fallout” that results when communication is fuzzy or filtered and offers some solutions to the conflicts that may result from poor communication.

“Conflict, the engine of social evolution,” John Locke

In some cases, the lack of information critical to managing and providing quality service manifests itself in conflict. Conflict happens. In its pure definition, it is friction that occurs as two forces are in opposition. In human relationships, conflict is not always so neatly defined, and it is not always a bad thing. Differences of opinion drive social and cultural evolution. In the world at large friction is the force that motivates us to respond to situations or adjust our behavior to changing circumstances. Conflict is a normal outcome of people dealing with other people, issues, and environments.

Internal and external disagreements can happen over a variety of differences and in many environments. These differences may be simple opinions and interpretations of events, or be a more widespread discussion over policy or budget priorities. Our initial reaction to most conflict is often stress and anxiety. While the stress can positively stimulate growth, it usually creates negative work conditions. Fight or flight is often the initial reaction to unpleasant friction in the workplace. Fight generally prolongs and expands conflict; flight ignores the problem, hoping that the unpleasantness and underlying issues will just go away. Although an initial fight response can potentially explode the conflict, flight or ignoring friction may create more damage over the long-term.

The personal stress arising from conflict costs our agencies efficiency and functionality. It often becomes an expensive proposition, an unplanned line item in our already stretched budgets. It impacts critical aspects of staff creativity, work production, and customer service. The most severe impact of unmanaged conflict is lost time and energy, both major efficiency leaks! Effective management demands that friction be recognized as a potential major cost.

Not all conflict and its effects can be managed. A good deal of it occurs suddenly; instantaneous events create unpleasant situations that even the best management plan could not properly anticipate. However, some arguments can be anticipated, even eliminated, with proper management preparation. Accept that conflict is part of the world and plays a large role as a change agent for good and bad. Acknowledge that we have a choice in how we respond as staff and management. Methods and approaches are available to us to manage, reduce, or in some cases eliminate potential problems.

What tools are available to help us to effectively deal with disagreements, to manage them at their onset, and to deal with their effects once they become a force in our agencies? Good communication—clear, open, honest, and personally directed—is a potent tool for managing conflict. Additionally, effective mediation or negotiation can augment existing methods of information sharing. Skillfully used, communication tools can have a marked, positive effect on long-term agency conflict management success.

Fuzzy or Filtered Communication

Prior to attempting any effort at managing arguments, it is important to address the roots of the friction. Conflict is often intertwined with poor communication models. Fuzzy, or non-existent communication, can create mixed messages. Remember the “telephone game?” Even the most clear and concise message can be distorted when it is re-communicated. Personal interpretation of information often results in misinterpretation. Probably the most damaging aspect of poor or incomplete information is when that information creates personal disagreements. Personalized arguments undermine agency effectiveness, creating mistrust, defensive thinking, reactive behavior, and ultimately a highly dysfunctional workplace.

Filtered communication, when only pieces or part of the information is communicated, is also an issue. Filtered messages can have some of the same negative impacts as fuzzy communication. Persons on the receiving end of filtered messages will soon feel disrespected, that they are not trusted or “qualified’ to get the whole message

Information that is doctored, filtered, or spun creates the potential for further mistrust in the long-term. Flawed communication, be it filtered, fuzzy, incomplete, or missing creates an environment of confusion and conflict. Any approach to managing conflict begins with improving communication.

A Best Practice for managing conflict begins with establishing, promoting, and honoring clear channels of communication. Building a culture of trust means communication and information are abundant resources. Information, and the communication tools that carry it (i.e., memos, phones, email, etc.) are indeed powerful management tools in the workplace. Smart managers recognize that personnel who are both well informed and participating in day-to-day information sharing are less likely to feed into rumors and workplace paranoia. Sincere communication, relaying information in a trustful manner, says R-E-S-P-E-C-T loud and clear.

Obviously, agencies cannot survive without a strong chain of command. Board members, directors, managers, and staff all need to have a strong sense of place, defined job tasks, and expected work outcomes. In short, boards make policy, the executive directors put policy into action, and the staff carries out the goals/objectives dedicated to maintaining customer service. Clear, respectful information sharing connects each link in this chain of command. Much conflict in human service agencies can be traced to breakdowns in this chain of communication. Executive directors are the intermediaries in this chain. Communication is undermined, conflicts abound, and agencies suffer when either board members or staff initiate discussions around the director, or do an “end run” around the director. This eventually isolates the director and renders the chain of command/communication impotent.

How do we formalize this “chain of communication?” Wise boards, with the assistance of their directors, develop and nurture policies that demand openness, which includes participation (feedback!) from managers/staff. Feedback—suggestions and collaborative problem solving—is a two-way street. For example, in these periods of budget duress/service curtailment, it behooves us to communicate abundantly throughout the agency.

Establishing this abundance of communication is a good beginning. Effective leadership means directors, board members, and staff members are all open to discussion. Everyone has input and everyone benefits; everyone has to “buy-in” to the process for it to work. Staff input goes a long way toward creating a work culture of “healthy” debate. A management policy on information sharing does two important things: one, it communicates trust and partnership to all staff and two, it puts in place a system that ensures that information will be abundant and shared, thereby averting conflicts that occur when communication is fuzzy or incomplete.

Negotiation

Okay, we have put into place an agency policy that sets the stage for abundant communication and information. But we still have issues to resolve. Where do we go now?

I’ve managed human service agencies for half of my 25 years in the rehabilitation field, and I’ve found abundant communication an effective tool for averting conflict. But abundant information is only one tool at our disposal. In even the best agency, there will be disagreement that will need further response. Apart from taking flight or fighting for our positions, we have another tool at our disposal: negotiation.

Negotiation is the method, approach, tool, or intervention that allows differing parties to share views on what they perceive to be the best outcome for their interests. Each party enters the negotiation with the intent to capture as many of their ideas and plans through a system of “verbal barter.” Obviously this verbal barter—the debate of ideas, plans, and desired outcomes—focuses on each party getting what they think is best. In reality, rarely, if ever, does either party get all that it desired in a negotiated settlement.

I’ve learned that negotiation requires a similar “buy-in” to abundant communication. For negotiation to be effective, everyone in the agency has to abide by the guidelines of trust, honesty, and maturity throughout the process. There must be an understanding that leaders and managers as well as staff members will use negotiation rules of engagement for the best interest of all.

Purposeful negotiation is getting the issues creating conflict out into the open, encouraging dialogue and healthy debate. Guided dialogue, within a proper framework, is an excellent management tool that seeks the best possible course of action or decision after all perspectives are weighed. It is as important to have a policy or guidelines for individual and agency “rules of engagement” in effective negotiation, as it is to have policy on abundant communication. An overriding consideration for entering any negotiation demands that for meaningful impact to take place, a general “no shortcuts” rule must be honored. I offer the following suggestions as a checklist for successful negotiating.

The Rules of Engagement

Rules of Engagement for Negotiating

1. Just the Facts, Ma’am

Nothing is as important for setting the stage for purposeful negotiation than getting the facts.

Getting the facts requires getting all the information that relates to the issue being considered. Common questions to be answered may include:

• “Is the information current;”
• “Is the information source reliable;”
• “What are the issues of conflict;” and
• “What parties are involved?”

Key to starting negotiations is having correct information. Incorrect, filtered, or fuzzy information will have a damaging effect on meaningful success. In fact, any negotiation based on flawed information is doomed at the onset. The energy expended initially to gather the facts is well spent, as it provides the framework for lasting and valid negotiation.

2. Give and Take

Negotiation is a give and take process. Understand at the onset:

• “What is indeed negotiable;”
• “What options can I bring to the discussion;” and
• “What are potential fall-back positions?”

All three questions need our input or a plan to address the answers. Our responses to these three questions will provide a great deal of potential flexibility, the give and take to the negotiation. Black and white responses won’t work. The art of negotiation, the whole process, is elastic. The more abundant the responses to the above questions, the more flexibility you bring to the process, and the better the outcomes.

3. Stick to the Issue

Throughout the negotiation process, always keep focused on the issue or issues on the table. Use an agenda designed to keep the pertinent issues on the table and stick to it. At the same time we want to stay on topic, we want to make sure we discuss it completely. It is helpful to maintain a working list of all the topics, or talking points. Even the best attempts at negotiation can be derailed or rendered invalid if we fail to keep all related issues open for discussion. Leave no loose ends!

4. Know What you Want

Have a clear idea of what you want to achieve, how you wish to proceed, and what the best outcome would look like. Determine in advance a “game plan” that lays out your opening moves, your data, feelings, and desires. In turn, the respectful negotiator acknowledges the data, feelings, and desires of the other participating parties in the negotiation process.

5. It’s Not Personal

Personalizing disagreements are all too common. The very issue of communication and information sharing is quite personal in itself, so this is an expected correlation. Finger pointing and “you” statements in any negotiating environment may derail any real chance of reaching meaningful settlement for either side. Focus on the issue not the personality; demonizing and condescending behavior will immediately shut down any chance of meaningful communication. In personalized conflict there is a high chance of escalating the friction, reducing any real chance of settlement.

6. Choose Your Battles Well

Determine what is important, necessary, and critical. There is potential for many little “battles” in the workplace. Ask yourself:

• “How important is this issue;”
• “Should I spend the energy or time over this minor conflict;”
• “Is this an isolated conflict;” or
• “Is this issue part of something larger that could be addressed at another time and place?”

Choosing battles takes a good dose of common sense and maturity on everyone’s part. Many larger conflicts arise out of smaller points of friction, either ignored or blown out of proportion due to inaction (flight doesn’t work!). Many issues can be managed on a one-at-a-time basis long before bigger conflicts arise.

7. Now? Timing is Key

Knowing when to engage is also an important consideration. Timing can be as critical as any other negotiation component. Sometimes picking the right time may be the sole element that determines success. Some of us are better than others at “reading the person or the moment.”

The best environment for negotiation is as far away from disruption and distraction as possible. An important social skill is knowing when to ask or challenge. Engaging in debate or hoping to initiate negotiation in a highly charged, stressful environment is risky. We need to be prepared, armed with the information needed to present our interests, if we are going to successfully negotiate.

Mediated Negotiation

I hope my “rules of engagement” help serve as guidelines for individuals in conflict. They work when both parties agree that it is in their best interest to work out differences in an environment of mutual give and take. However, there may be situations when it may be necessary to have an unbiased third party guide or referee the negotiation. This may be the case in more involved discussions when facts are disputed or when a personality is indeed the focal point of friction.

Mediated negotiation, or more simply mediation, is the management tool that binds differing parties in a formal communication environment. There have been many books and articles written about mediation and at the end of this article is a list of resources you can access. Briefly, the mediator’s role is to actively enforce the rules of engagement, seek consensus, and ultimately guide the course of negotiation to its logical outcome.

Mediation is common practice used in negotiation and applied to many aspects of our professional, business, and personal lives. As a formal negotiation tool, it demands trust, honesty, and maturity for success. When used effectively mediation is indeed a powerful management approach to seeking consensus in conflict-charged atmospheres within agencies and when we advocate in the community.

Conclusion

Conflict happens! All conflict is not negative; sometimes it is the necessary friction that stimulates healthy discussion as well as personal and agency growth. When it is disruptive it costs agencies time and energy. The unresolved conflict disrupts effective customer service, the very reason for our existence as a human service agency. Much friction may indeed be managed through effective, direct, and respectful communication among all levels of agency staff. Conflict may be effectively managed with pro-active methods before the friction becomes unmanageable and damages agency operations. We can ignore it at our peril or we can effectively engage, beginning by making communication abundant.

Resources

Condeluci, Al. (2002). Cultural Shifting, Community Leadership and Change. St. Augustine, Florida: Training Resource Network, Inc.

Fisher, Roger and Ury, William. (1983). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books.

Griffin, Cary. (1998). Working Better,
Working Smarter: Six Stages of Organizational Development. St. Augustine, Florida: Training Resource Network, Inc.

Heyman, Richard. (1994) Why Didn’t You Say that in the First Place? How to be Understood at Work. San Francisco: Josey-Bass Publishers.

Kaye, Beverly and Jordan-Evans, Sharon. (2002). Love ‘Em or Lose ‘Em, Getting Good People to Stay. Scranton: Pennsylvania: Career Systems International.

Scholtes, Peter R. (1998). The Leader’s Handbook: Making Things Happen, Getting Things Done. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Wycoff, Joyce and Richardson, Tim. (1995). Transformation Thinking: Tools & Techniques that Open the Door to Powerful New Thinking. East Rutherford, New Jersey: Berkely Publishing Corporation.