2. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
Understanding Conflict,
…when the times get tough, conflict gets tougher
David E Morrison, M.D.
A context for conflict
Conflict develops from differences and is the engine of growth, innovation,
and creativity. When two people observe a sculpture from different positions
they have conflicting views. When they view problems from different positions
and backgrounds there is opportunity for each of them to think of the problems in
new ways. People confront tough times with different perspectives, values, goals,
needs, and vulnerabilities. Those differences conflict with each other, even as
they increase the number of ideas the group has about the problems and possible
solutions. If the conflicts are managed, the differences will enrich the vision of
what the problems and solutions are. Differences offer us more possibilities if we
have the judgment, knowledge, and skills to manage the inherent conflicts
associated with them.
Unfortunately, conflict is too often mismanaged and then it squanders
energy and time. The most common mistake is to sweep it under the rug where it
smolders and contributes to procrastination, avoidance and plans for revenge.
Individuals and groups dealing with mismanaged conflict feel fatigue as a result of
physical and psychological wasted energy. The work is impacted because people
are distracted and not aligned. During tough times these challenges increase.
A threatening environment undermines everyone’s ability to manage
conflict, which will impede productivity. Thus, in difficult times there is likely to
be more interpersonal conflict and it is more likely to be mismanaged.
2
3. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
Difficult times increase interpersonal conflict.
No matter what side you were on in the political debates of 2009 and 2010,
you had an opportunity to observe and experience what tough times does to
conflict. The American political process has become polarized. Conflicts have
increased with no signs of resolution. When individuals have compromised with
the other side, they have been called traitors instead of Americans. Ideologues
have become unquestioned leaders of people on both sides of the argument, and
the arguments are too frequently extreme and emotional.
Tough times push people in conflict to extremes and thus make it more
likely that the outcome of the conflict will be destructive, not creative. This is not
just true in the political arena, but in families and organizations. For any leader
managing conflict, detoxifying it and using it to come up with innovative solutions
is an important responsibility.
In difficult times, however, more people find it incongruous to think of
conflict as constructive. In fact, there is significant pessimism about humans’
ability to make conflict constructive. Even the American Heritage Dictionary of
the English Language first defines conflict as “... prolonged fighting; a battle,”
“disharmony between incompatible or antithetical persons.” It is not until the
fourth definition that one gets to a constructive role: “... opposition that
motivates or shapes the action of the plot.”
In order for conflicting views to help a group see alternatives and new
possible solutions, the individuals must be willing to let go of their ideas (at least
for a while) and accept that their perspective is not the only one or even the best
perspective. New solutions to problems are not possible if ideas and opinions are
fixed. When that happens either one side will dominate the other, or the conflict
will become chronic. Within chronic conflict there are usually episodes of
escalation. “Escalation” in this context is used to indicate increasing emphasis on
differences and moving the conflict into the arena of destructive outcomes.
3
4. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
So there can be a range of conflict from a simple difference to war. The
closer the conflict gets to the war-‐end of the continuum, the more destructive it
is. That can be diagramed as in the following figure.
Awareness of differences helps people see there are alternative approaches
to problems. Becoming aware of differences, however, increases the chance of a
destructive outcome, even if that chance is small. When one of the parties talks
about the differences, confrontation of the conflict has occurred, minimal but still
a confrontation. When the language becomes more extreme in terms of each
party glorifying their side and denigrating the other sides, it is just a short step to
becoming uncompromising. Righteousness, revenge, and reliance on ideology
contribute to an uncompromising stance. Armed conflict and war are next.
Monitoring the way differences are handled will help leaders decide what to do to
keep conflict on the constructive end of the continuum.
The downward spiral of tough times and mismanaged conflict
The more threatened people feel, the more they move into the destructive
realm of conflict. Understanding why this happens helps leaders decide how to
confront the problem. That understanding relies on some fundamental biological
realities. When the world is threatening, everything is more raw. Negative
4
5. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
affects help humans deal with danger. When danger increases so do negative
affects, in variety and intensity. Thus, there are more negative feelings, which are
stronger than in normal or easy times. Furthermore, the governing effect of the
intellect over the emotions is diminished, because emotions are more primitive
and coping is strained (see splitting below).
An increase in the variety and intensity of negative emotions makes conflict
more difficult to address. For example, the frustration caused by others seeing
dangers and opportunities differently easily turns into anger. After a time, when
the others hold on to their conflicting views the anger can turn into distress and
even shame — both of which can lead to more anger. Strong negative emotions
can undermine judgment, realistic perceptions and acceptance of difference. To
avoid those feelings many people automatically avoid differences that may lead
to conflict. Then conflict avoidance becomes a problem.
An example of conflict avoidance is the CEO who does not confront a sullen
obstructionist subordinate who is slowing down important work to make a
merger successful. The CEO and others know his tolerance of such behavior puts
the company at risk. The CEO’s avoidance of confrontation becomes
understandable when we learn that the subordinate moved his family to a
different state and took a tough assignment as a favor to the CEO before the
merger was considered. The merger caused unanticipated changes, even as the
economy dipped. Now the subordinate is stuck in the assignment with less
authority because there are no other positions for him. (This is not an unusual
story.)
Tough times and organizational changes created a different reality than was
anticipated. The CEO’s discomfort is understandable, but it does not justify his
conflict avoidance. He must not put the company at risk because of his feelings of
guilt. In tough times, there are many broken promises. One of the reasons the
times are tough is because most people are not getting what they planned for. It
is not just that the expectations are different; it is that people made plans on
those expectations. Leaders will feel sad or even angry when plans are dashed,
5
6. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
but they don’t deserve to feel guilty for events outside of their control. Guilt and
shame are notorious culprits in conflict avoidance.
Avoiding conflict and confrontation to avoid guilt or shame causes more
guilt and shame (for not acting appropriately). Then everything becomes
confusing because of the different feelings and coping mechanisms associated
with guilt and shame. For example, common coping devices for shame are:
withdrawal, attack self, attack other, and avoidance. Everyone (including the
embarrassed person) will only see the coping devices (defenses) and not their
cause — shame. This can be confusing for everyone.
A common and problematic coping mechanism, especially in groups, is
splitting. When a person or group uses splitting, the issues are seen in extremes.
It is diagramed below.
People see problems as black or white, “we” or “they,” good or bad, “with
us” or “against us.” Obviously, this coping device moves the conflict to the
destructive end of the continuum. The associated emotions make it difficult to
get people back to a realistic view of the issues. Realistically perceiving problems
causes unpleasant feelings, such as anxiety. As long as people perceive the world
in the all or none way of splitting they don’t feel anxious. They are likely to feel
triumphant, clever, special, or angry. Those feelings and others associated with
6
7. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
splitting are pleasant, even the anger. The anger is likely to be righteous, which
can be quite enjoyable, particularly if you share it with a group. That is one of the
challenges for leaders dealing with conflict in tough times—getting people to
commit to seeing issues realistically instead of in ways that make them
comfortable.
The interplay between tough times and conflict contributes to power plays
becoming nastier and more devious (described in the second paper).
Mismanaged conflict, including conflict avoidance, makes tough times more
difficult.
Managing conflict in tough times
Managing conflict in tough times requires extra awareness, skill,
knowledge, and discipline. Even simple differences can be problematic when
people are distressed. For then, some people see any signs of difference as
indications of an enemy. Staying realistic and on task is more difficult while new
solutions (from the possibilities well-‐managed conflict uncovers) are needed more
than ever. Those solutions lie within the conflict.
Leaders are forced to wrestle with conflicting demands on them as well as
impulses inside of themselves. For example, when people are tired and fearful,
leaders must work harder not to avoid conflict. When feelings are strongest,
leaders need better-‐than-‐average skills with emotions. When it seems risky to
show any vulnerability, leaders need to be strong enough to ask for help. For no
one can manage conflict without getting help, at least from the person on the
opposing side. If the person on the opposite side of the conflict will not offer help
in finding a solution there will be no win-‐win resolution.
Everyone must try harder to put conflict in perspective. It is tempting to
get moralistic about conflict when people are stressed. Leaders, however, must
not demonize conflict. Then they must help their people avoid doing the same.
This can be done in discussions with their team. Such discussions start with a
survey of the group about how conflict is being managed in the difficult times
7
8. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
compared to normal times. The team also must discuss and agree on ground
rules for managing conflict. There are sources in the literature for such
discussions. (How Management Teams Can Have a Good Fight; Kathleen M.
Eisenhardt, Jean L.Kahwajy, and L. J. Bourgeois III, Harvard Business Review, July-‐
August 1997 is a useful article for starting a discussion on how a team wants to
manage conflict.)
Awareness is the first tool in managing conflict at any time. It is even more
important during difficult times because of the temptation to hide conflict.
Awareness of the complicating factors described in this paper is also useful. Thus,
defining the conflict and the specifics associated with it are the first steps. The
real conflict isn’t always what people are making the most noise about.
Sometimes just defining the real conflict is all that needs to be done. That isn’t
always true but when it happens it is nice.
Deciding what people want (other than not losing) is part of defining the
conflict. Part of the reason it is important to define the conflict and what people
want, is to make sure they solve only what needs to be solved. Otherwise the
work can become interminable.
It is always necessary to work on it long enough. Distressed people often
need to push themselves to work on resolving conflict longer or they jump to
action prematurely. One of the reasons the work on conflict stops too soon is the
difficult emotions stirred up by this task. Thus, all parties need to expect to
tolerate some unpleasant feelings.
The unpleasant emotions can keep leaders from seeing their own roles in
problems. It is tempting to discount or diminish the part they play in the
mismanagement of conflict. Leaders need to set the example and be fearless
about defining their roles in the problem (at least to themselves). Even if they are
just observers they have some role in the conflict. When they can define their
roles in the conflict they can use that information to help resolve it.
8
9. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
Compromise is important for a win-‐win result. While win-‐win is the goal, it
is unlikely any resolution will be perfect for anyone. So once the issues are
solved, everyone must put the conflict behind them. Then, of course, expect
more, particularly if the times are tough.
As leaders work on the challenges of conflict they can regularly step outside
the fray and evaluate the process. They can review the challenges of conflict and
ask these questions:
1. Are the feelings appropriate to the content? If not, are they:
Too strong?
Based upon extreme views?
All of one kind (e.g., negative, anger, fear) or is there an appropriate
mix?
Increasing or decreasing?
2. Is the language objective or provocative?
3. Are people willing to suspend their views and look at the issues from the
other side’s perspective?
4. Is there a win-‐lose dynamic?
5. How much are they caught up in one side of the conflict?
6. How can the conflict be used to give them more options in order to solve
their problems?
Conclusion:
Conflict makes tough times tougher. Tough times make conflict more
difficult to manage. If conflict is managed it offers ways out of the turbulence. To
manage it one needs to:
1. See conflict as a fact of life and not either good or bad.
2. Be aware of its danger and potential,
3. Not be intimidated by it, and
4. Address conflict in a way that minimizes negative emotions.
9
10. Understanding Conflict,
David Morrison, M.D.
David E. Morrison, M.D.
Morrison Associates, Ltd.
650 First Bank Drive, Palatine, Il. 60067
847/991-‐2260
Fax: 847991-‐1343
dmmd@morrisonltd.com
www.morrisonltd.com
10
