In the simplest terms conflicts that are based in ideas or the how can we X realm of thinking are conflicts that can be openly hashed out in a team setting, these can be defined as constructive conflicts. Conversely conflicts that are personal and perhaps behavioral in nature are those that likely need to be addressed privately. A leader can help their team members to air their grievances by creating an environment conducive to open conversation and even constructive conflict. This often means increasing trust in order for individuals to feel comfortable discussing their mistakes and weaknesses (Lencioni 2002, 182) A team that avoids airing grievances is one that is politically driven and more concerned with avoiding any type of conflict as the team does not have a basis in trust across its members. In my personal work experience I attempt to air grievances as close in time as feasible to the event in question. To avoid conflict is to allow things to fester and prevents productive discourse that could help my team work more effectively. The earlier this is addressed the faster we can get to peak efficiency.

In the hypothetical scenario outlined above I would address them as follows. For the team members disagreeing about productivity I would meet with them and the rest of the seven reports in a group setting. I would direct the conversation around accountability and verify that everyone was making headway on their respective projects and that there were no road blocks preventing forward movement. In this way all team members can understand what each person is working on and what barriers might be preventing them from contributing at a level which might otherwise be expected.

For the worker who is expressing their personal political views in the workplace I would meet with this individual privately in a neutral location. I would direct the conversation around how their actions are making others uncomfortable and how political speech goes against the company policies. This is a form of unproductive conflict and needs to stop.

For the go to worker who is taking on every task I would again have a meeting with the entire team in a group setting. I would direct the conversation around prioritization. If they are taking on a lot of projects in order to be challenged and are meeting this challenge that is one thing. If they are failing to complete items they have taken on then we need to see if anyone else is able to pick up the slack or if this can be delegated to a lower level under the purview of the worker taking on every task. This meeting would hopefully identify what projects need to be moved around and generate agreement on what is top priority.

Give your feedback to the discussion above and question to be answered?