Read the article below and make a 3 paragraph summary

the question is writing a summary about the reading.

How to Preempt Team Conflict BY GINKA TOEGEL AND JEAN-LOUIS BARSOUX eam conflict can add value or destroy it. Good conflict fosters respectful debate and yields mutually agreed-upon solutions that are often far superior to those first offered. Bad conflict occurs when team members simply can't get past their differences, killing productivity and stifling innovation. Aune 2016 Harvard Business Review 79 SPOTLIGHT ON MANAGING TEAMS Disparate opinions aren't the root of the problem, the discussions. Indeed, we've found that managers however. Most destructive conflict stems from can master these conflict prevention skills far more something deeper a perceived incompatibility in easily than those required for conflict resolution the way various team members operate due to any number of factors, including personality, industry. Five Conversations race, gender, and age. The conventional approach Because the five conversations we propose go so far to working through such conflict is to respond to beyond typical "getting to know you" chitchat, it's clashes as they arise or wait until there is clear evi important to kick them off properly. First, although dence of a problem before addressing it. But these this may seem obvious, make sure to include ev approaches routinely fail because they allow frustra eryone on the team and explain why you're initiat tions to build for too long, making it difficult to reseting the discussions. You might say something like negative impressions and restore trust "Working on a team means collaborating with people In our 25 years of researching team dynam whose approaches may differ from your own. Let's ics, coaching teams in Fortune 500 corporations, explore these differences now, while the pressure is and teaching thousands of executives at Duke off, so that they don't catch us by surprise and gen University, London Business School, and IMD, erate unproductive conflict at an inopportune mo we've found that a proactive approach is much ment." Explain that the focus of the discussions will more effective. When you surface differences before be on the process of work rather than the content a team starts work even when the group seems As the facilitator, make sure that people are com homogeneous and harmonious--you can preempt fortable sharing at their own pace and coach them destructive conflict on how to ask clarifying, nonjudgmental questions We have developed and tested a methodology of one another. Encourage everyone to begin state that focuses on five areas: how people look, actments within my world...and questions within speak, think, and feel. Team leaders facilitatea your world." This phrasing, borrowed from one ries of 20-to yo-minute conversations, encouraging nizational behavior scholar Bear Schen, reinforces members to expeess their preferences and expects the idea that underlying sources of differences are tions in each area, identify the most likely areas of irrelevant. What does matter is the attitudes and be misalignment or friction, and come up with sug. havions expressed as a result of each person's cum gestions for how those with differing expectations lative personal and professional experience. Forex can work together. Through the nonjudgmental ample, the fact that you are assertive may be related exchange of ideas and feedback, teams establisha to your personality ndes, or culture, but the only foundation of trust and understanding and are and are able thing your colleges need to know is that you tend to set ground rules for effective collaboration to value your opinions in plantes Though setting aside time for these conversa Team members are likely to be hesitant as you be tions up front might seem onerous, we've found gin, so ease everyone into the process by volunteer ing to share first. Once the dialogue is steam, let cold, c-suite or frontline that will be collaborat others lide (but not dominate it. Eventually, peo ngon nificant work for an extended period of ple will move from superficiales de time. Leaders need to special training to cate discussion. As they ten to the responses of oth ees and offer the they will develop not only The five topics can be addressed in any de to be the most logical, especially with new teams, We unconsciously respond to cues in how people look, move, and dress. feel. The factors should not get en 100% Give Feedback to Microsoft 22 Stv How to Preempt Team Conflict.pdf (page 4 of 7) a 0 HOW TO PREEMPT TEAM CONFLICT HER.ORG Idea in Brief THE PROBLEM Team conflict erupts not because of differences in opinion but because of a perceived incompatibility in the way different team members think and act. When people can't get past their differences, the resulting clashes will productivity and stifte Innovation AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW Derences in perspective and experience can generate great value, of course. A new methodology helps leaders guide their teams through five conversation before work starts to build shared understanding and lay the foundation fo effective collaboration IN PRACTICE The approach focuses on the process of work rather than the content Leaders facilitate targeted discussions that explore the varying ways team members look, act, speak. think, and feel, toimmune the team against unproductive conflict when the pressure is on overlap. Likewise, if participants struggle with the at all times, it's like you think you're special, and "In my world language, it can be tweaked. that creates distance." Let's now consider the five categories in tur. A similar situation arose at a heavy-engineering company when a female designer joined its board LOOK: Her colorful clothing and introductory comments Spotting the Difference QUESTIONS TO ASK which included two literary references, made Colleagues routinely make fast judge your world.. her pragmatic peers think she valued style over ments especially negative ones) pri Abadet substance, which set her up to be marginalized about the character, competence, or ...what do you notice An example that highlights the value of discus status of their peers on the basis of about others dress, ing perceptions up front comes from a global food the briefest exposure-what Nalini demeanor group, where a leadership development rotation of Ambady and Robert Rosenthal, in te w does that you promising young executives had been creating search conducted at Harvard, called think about them in sentment among older subsidiary executives, most thin slices of behavior. These resc pustyy notably in the Australian operation. The local team witangle tions are often tapered by differences in the way people present themselves. eden, een credencial de you are had developed a dysfunctional "keep your head down" attitude and simply tolerated each am We unconsciously respond to cues in con MRA he or she moved on. But whence how they look, move, and dress, in de you pere ing manager engaged his team in the five covers their tone of voice, and in what they were tions at the start of his term, he was able to dispel say about themselves, the negative preconceptions and develop for The goal of this conversation is to help team productive relationships than his predecessorshad members reflect on how they intend to come across to others and how they actually do. A ACT: QUESTIONS TO AS good place to begin is a discussion about the driv in your world Misjudging Behavior ers of status in team members respective worlds." how importante On diverse teams, clashing behavioral For example, some people puta premium on job punctuality and time norms are common sources of trouble related characteristics, such as experience, con Seemingly trivial gestures can have a nections, and functional background. For oth being proportionem pactating ers, status is linked to demographic cues such as types, alienating people, and diren age, gender, nationality, and education Team comunication flows. members can quickly put colleagues off by empha Physical boundaries often apo suring the wrong Credentials, adopting an unsuit able persona, or even dressing inappropriately for the culture. One cutive from the buttoned-up former that retired French Soccer player The Henry set off when, as a TV pundite banking sector faced this type of conflict when acting to surprising breaking news, he heed an advertising group. In a team discus touched the thigh of his malenglish sion, one of his colleagues told him, "The mom p. Prench culture accepts that here is business cal. So by wearing a stand the How to Preempt Team Conflict.pdf (page 5 of 7) U shallow self-promotion. Expectations for how much colleagues should help one another, as opposed to contributing individually to the group effort, can also vary widely. For example, a team of soft- ware engineers ran into problems when it became clear that some members were very selective in giving aid to peers, while others did so whenever asked. Those who spent more time helping others nderstandably began to feel resentful and dis- advantaged, since doing so often interfered with their own work. It's important to establish team norms around all these behaviors up front to avoid unnecessary antagonism. colleagues in the macho world of British football, it was a step too far. Or consider the introverted, high- anxiety executive we worked with whose warm and gregarious peer made him uncomfortable: Their ex. pectations for the proper distance at which to inter- act differed starkly. "I was taking a coffee with him at one of those standing tables," he remembers. "We literally shuffled round the table as he moved toward me and I tried to reestablish my buffer zone." Attitudes about time can stir up conflict, too. People differ widely-even within the same firm or department with regard to the importance of being punctual and respectful of other people's schedules. More broadly, the value of keeping projects on pace and hitting milestone deadlines may be paramount to some, whereas others may value flexibility and the ability to nimbly respond as circumstances un fold. An example comes from a Nordic industrial ma- chinery company that had recurrent tensions in the top team. The non-Nordic executives in the group were deeply frustrated by what they saw as a lack of urgency shown by their Nordic colleagues, and they responded with brusqueness-which, of course, upset their peers. Eventually, the group discussed the situation and set new rules of engagement. But a preemptive conversation would have saved them all a great deal of time and energy Differing levels of assertiveness between team members can present problems as well. Male ex ecutives, for example, or people from individuals tic corporate and national cultures, often feel quite comfortable volunteering for special assignments or nominating themselves to take on additional respon sibilities because they consider it a sign of commit ment, competence, and self-confidence. But others may see those actions as blatant, undignified, and SPEAK: QUESTIONS TO ASK "in your world... Dividing by Language is a promise an aspiration Communication styles have many di- or a parte mensions--the words people choose which is most important to express themselves, tolerance for directness or harmony candor, humor, pauses and interrup are irony and sarca tions, and so on and the possibilities appreciated? for misunderstanding are endless de interruptions Teams made up of people with dif ferent native languages present signs ...does silence mean reflection or disempre cant challenges in this area. But even should dissenting viewsbe when everyone is fluent in a particu aired in publicar dised lar language, there may be deep dil off-line ferences in how individuals express is noted back themselves. For example, depending welcome on context, culture, and other fac tors,"yes" can mean maybe or "let's try it or even no way." At a European software firm we worked with two executives were at each other's throats over what one of them called "bro ken promises. Discussion revealed that words one had interpreted as a firm commitment were merely aspirational to his counterpart. Sometimes even laudable organizational goals can engender troublesome communication dynam ics: For example, corporations that promote a cual ture of positivity may end up with employees who are reluctanto afraid to challenge or article. As the marketing director of a fast-moving consumer goods firm told us "You're not supposed to be negative about people's ideas. What's going through the back of your mind is I can't see this working But what comes out of your mouth is Weah, that's great When teams discuss at the outset how much doris appropriate, they can establish clear guidelines about speaking up or pushing back on others. At Differing attitudes about the importance of deadlines often stir up conflict. How to Preempt Team Conflict.pdf (page 6 of 7) differences, a facilitator sed role play to help the two groups better understand each other's perspective a German investment bank, a top team that had been dominated by several assertive consultants adopted a "four sentence rule-a cutoff for each person's contributions in meetings as a way to encourage taking turns and give more reserved members a chance to contribute. At Heineken USA, board mem bers use little toy horses that sit on the conference table to accomplish the same goal: If you're talking and someone tips one over, you know you're beating a dead horse and it's time to move on. THINK: Occupying Different Mindsets QUESTIONS TO ASK Perhaps the biggest source of conflict "in your world. certainty viewed as a on teams stems from the way in which threat or an opportunity members think about the work they're What's more important: the doing. Their varied personalities and picture the detai experiences make them alert to vary. ist better to be reliable or ing signals and cause them to take dif- flexible ferent approaches to problem solving What is the antitude toward and decision making. This can result failure? in their working at cross-purposes. As how do people tolerate one executive with a U.S. apparel.com deviations from the planir pany noted: "There is often tension between the ready-fire-aim types on our team and the more analytical colleagues." We found this dynamic in a new product team at a Dutch consumer goods company. Members' cognitive styles differed greatly, particularly with regard to methodical versus intuitive thinking. Once aware of the problem, the project manager initiated discussions about ways to rotate leadership of the project, matching team needs to mindsets. During the more creative and conceptual phases, the free- thinkers would be in charge, while analytical and detail-oriented members would take over evalua tion, organization, and implementation activities. All members came to understand the value of the different approaches. Teams also need to find alignment on tolerance for risk and shifting priorities. A striking example comes from a biotech team made up of scientists and executives. By virtue of their training, the scientists embraced experimentation, accepted failure as part of the discovery process, and valued the continued pursuit of breakthroughs, regardless of time hori on or potential for commercial applications. That mindsetjared their MBA-trained peers, who sought predictability in results and preferred to all projects that failed to meet expectations. To bridge those FEEL: QUESTIONS TO ASK "in your world Charting Emotionals what emotions positive Team members may differ widely in and negative) ne the intensity of their feelings, how and acceptable to display they convey passion in a group, and in a business con the way they manage their emotions how do people express in the face of disagreement or conflict. anger er enthusiasm Sometimes enthusiasm can over- how would you react whelm peers or fuel skepticism. An you were and with a tramite (with silence extroverted CMO at a logistics com body langar, humor pany we worked with assumed that through a third party the more passion she showed for her Ideas, the more responsive the group would be to them. But herrah-ral approach was too much for the introverted, pragmatic CEO. She would start picking apart proposals whenever the CHO got excited. At the other extreme, strong nega tive emotions-especially over displays of anger- can be upsetting or intimidating Negative feelings can be a sensitive issue to broach, so it's helpful to start by talking about the kind of context team members are used to. From there, the discussion can get more personal. For ee ample, in one conversation we facilitated at a con- struction company, an executive told his colleagues that "yelling was common in his previous work place but that it was a habit he wanted to correct. He told us that he had made this disclosure to keep Thime honest in pursuit of that goal Early discussions should touch on not only the risks of venting but also the danger of bottling things up. The tendency to signal limitation or discontent indirectly-through withdrawal, sarcasm, and pel vately complaining about one another-can be just as destructive as voleutbursts and intimidation It's important to address the causes of disengage ment directly through open inquiry and debate, and come up with ways to disagree productively, THE BENEFITS anticipating and heading of conflict before it becomes destructive are immense. We've found that they include greater participation, im- proved creativity, and, ultimately, smarter decision making. As one manager put it. "We still disagree but there's less bad Wood and a genuine sense of valuing each other's contribution