Conflict management takes effort, but, if you’re able to follow a few team conflict management strategies like sticking to the facts and keeping everyone focused on solutions, the effort will make the team stronger.

Conflict in Teams
Businesses use teams to leverage the combined skills, knowledge and experience of employees with differing backgrounds to achieve specific goals. But these differences among team members can also lead to conflict as people struggle to find their place on the team or project. Team conflict is generally easy to identify, but there are instances when work is getting done and conflict is brewing beneath the surface.

Signs of team conflict include:

• Name calling
• Gossiping
• Increased absenteeism
• Complaining
• Anger
• Not sharing information
• Lack of results
• Missed deadlines

Train Your Team to Identify Conflict
One method of dealing with conflict in teams is to train team members and leaders about how to deal with conflict before the teams starts to work together. Team members need to learn how to listen to each other effectively without getting emotionally involved and deal with deal with opposing viewpoints.

Workplace conflict is commonplace, but managers who can incorporate certain types of conflict management strategies that work will soon be able to achieve their goals and minimize disruptions. Managers will successfully eliminate conflicts and turn the situation into a problem-solving opportunity that will ultimately benefit the entire office.

Collaboration: This conflict management strategy is considered one of the most successful, but it needs the right environment to work. The idea is that both sides work together in a spirit of teamwork to reach goals and preserve relationships. It works best when there is a long-term business relationship in place and the common goals are what is best for the company.

An example of a collaborative conflict management strategy is this: Employees are notified that the company health care insurance policy will change and there are meetings held to review and choose a new plan. Some want a plan that offers a lower deductible with more limited options, while others seek a more comprehensive plan with a higher deductible. Collaborating allows employees to choose the plan that best suits the company as a whole.

Compromise: This strategy requires both sides to give up something to gain something they feel is greater. It is best utilized in a situation where both sides are fairly equal in status and neither side puts forward too many demands. Ultimately, the solutions put in place cannot be in direct opposition to the long-term goals of the group or company.

An example of compromise conflict management is: One group of employees is outraged that their work is made harder because of something that another group is failing to do. Both parties feel the duty belongs to the other. A compromise would allow both parties to restructure the flow of work and agree to take on shared aspects of the duty so neither side is overburdened.

Force: This is a type of conflict management strategy that is effective in certain situations where time and decision-making abilities are most important. This situation works best when there is a formal authority that can be exercised or a conflict is potentially destructive or disruptive to the company. It can have drawbacks, as this method rarely addresses the concerns of the other party. However, many managers use this style to cease hostilities and end nonproductive behavior. Then they can revisit and resolve the underlying issues at a later time.

An example of force conflict management is: Workers who use some expensive heavy-duty machinery have figured out a way to affect the performance of the machinery in an untested and unproven way. When the workaround is brought to management’s attention, the manager demonstrates how the action puts the company in non-compliance and the practice will not be tolerated. Employees insist that it makes the job easier and they are willing to take the risks. The manager makes it a policy that any employee caught performing the workaround will be disciplined.

When conflict management styles clash, it can make trouble for the employees involved, as mixed messages are sent, and the situation may not be resolved in the most effective and timely manner. Conflict management, or the way someone chooses to respond to a situation, can be handled in several different ways with varying results. When two or more different strategies come into play, tensions can be heightened, not resolved.

Different Conflicts, Different Strategies
Among the conflict management strategies are competing, compromising, avoiding or collaborating. Competing is when someone’s interests and opinions are put forward ahead of someone else’s. Compromising is giving a little to each side, and avoiding is ignoring or purposefully being passive in the conflict. Each strategy has its place in resolving conflicts, but when two different people implement their own conflict management strategies to a situation, there will be a disconnect on the resolution. Collaborating is considered the most effective conflict management strategy as it acknowledges each party’s concerns and makes a solution that completely satisfies each side possible.

Choosing the appropriate conflict management strategy for a conflict situation is important. Consider factors such as time pressure (how quickly the conflict must be resolved), issue (how important the problem is), association (how valuable the relationship is) and authority (the power levels of each party).

Solving the Problem
When conflict management styles clash, each party should stop and try to focus on the problem. By clearly identifying each person’s goals, the foundation is set for resolution. Other options when conflict management styles clash is to resort to predefined rules and regulations for a resolution, to bring in a mediator who is neutral to the conflict, to hold negotiations and to reassess each strategy if there is no resolution.

Avoid several ineffective conflict management strategies such as secrecy, ignoring the problem, delaying resolution, judging the conflict to be a waste of time and personally attacking another in order to undermine the problem. These actions are stumbling blocks to an otherwise effective conflict management resolution.