It may not be pleasant to experience, but conflict is necessary to innovate successfully. Without competing ideas, it's virtually impossible to create great products. Unfortunately, many conflicts are handled poorly; they are hidden or result in personal attacks. In this article, I explain how you can skilfully navigate conflict and use it as a source of creativity and innovation for your products.
Listen to the audio version of this article:
Why Conflict Matters
Conflict is often seen as something bad that should not occur. But in fact, it’s perfectly normal. It commonly happens when people with different perspectives, needs, and goals engage.[1] This is especially true in product management.
As product people, we work with individuals from various business units or departments with different views and ideas. Think of the salespeople, marketers, and customer support team members, as well as the UX designers, architects, programmers, and testers you might interact with.
What’s more, innovation relies on conflict. How can you create something new and amazing when everybody quickly agrees? In the worst case, you practise design by committee, broker a weak compromise, and agree on the smallest common denominator. But that’s hardly a recipe for achieving product success. Innovation requires diverging ideas and passionate arguments; it requires the willingness to experience and resolve conflict.
Additionally, effective collaboration and teamwork rely on the ability to leverage conflict. Otherwise, teams will find it difficult to perform well and become truly productive, closely-knit units.[2]
What Gives Conflict a Bad Name
Sadly, conflict is often poorly handled, especially at work. Most disputes I have witnessed were not dealt with properly; many were never resolved.[3]
Often, the conflict is suppressed or ignored—it’s swept under the carpet. Say you strongly disagree with the way a senior stakeholder talks to you and requests a new feature. But instead of addressing the issue, you pretend that all is well. Other times, the conflict escalates and turns into a verbal fight, in which the more senior, powerful person typically wins.
In both cases, the conflict has turned toxic. It leaves behind a trail of bad feelings and mistrust. Relationships are damaged, and effective collaboration is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. What’s more, suppressing the negative emotions, which are usually present in a conflict, increases your stress levels and can harm your mental health.
Resolving Conflict with Non-Violent Communication
So, how can you deal with disputes constructively? How can you have good, healthy conflicts? One way to achieve this is to use Non-Violent Communication (NVC), a conflict resolution framework developed by Marshall Rosenberg. It consists of the four components shown in Table 1:
The framework in Table 1 offers a structure to break down conflict into its key elements and address them step by step. You start by sharing each other’s perspectives. Then, you explore the feelings that are present and connect them to underlying, unmet needs. Following this process builds trust and understanding. It puts you in the position to make a request and address the root cause of the conflict.
Conflict resolution is therefore not about winning, retaliating, or putting the other person in their place. It’s about establishing a dialogue, developing a shared perspective on what happened, agreeing on the changes required, re-establishing trust, and rebuilding the relationship.
To put it differently, if you believe that you are right and the other person is entirely to blame, and if you are not prepared to change your own behaviour, if required, then you won’t be able to apply the NVC framework; resolving the conflict will not be possible.
The Non-Violent Communication framework might be simple, but it can be hard to put in practice. The following tips will help you effectively use it.[4]
Step 1: Observations
The best way to start the process is to schedule a meeting with the other person so you can have a focused and confidential conversation. Clearly state what you saw happening and what you heard the individual say. Avoid criticism, judgment, or blame. Stick to the facts and purely state your observations. As Oren Jay Sofer writes in his book Say What You Mean, “The less blame and criticism are in our words, the easier it will be for others to hear us and to work toward a solution.”
However, sharing your observations is only part of what needs to happen. The other, sometimes more challenging aspect is to attentively listen while refraining from quickly criticising or dismissing what you hear. This does not mean that you have to agree with the other person. But it allows you to understand their perspective, which is a prerequisite for resolving the dispute.
To succeed with step one, make sure that you don’t engage in a blame game. Don’t label the other person, for example, as difficult, mean, bad, or selfish. Don’t assume that you are right, and they are wrong and possibly have bad intentions.[5]
Step 2: Feelings
Emotions play a key role in conflicts. After all, a conflict is a disagreement that involves difficult feelings like confusion, aversion, anger, and fear. It’s a common mistake to ignore the emotional side of a conflict and focus on its rational part.
Take the scenario I shared earlier: A senior stakeholder requests a new feature in a way you find hurtful. If you now focus on the feature, determine if and when it should be implemented using, for instance, a cost-benefit analysis, and you ignore the difficult feelings that are present, then resolving the conflict with the NVC framework will not be possible.
It is therefore important to acknowledge your feelings. To help you recognise them, use the following four questions.[6]
- How do you feel?
- Where do you feel it?
- What does it feel like? Is there pressure, tightness, aching, heaviness?
- Are there any thoughts or stories connected with the emotion? If you had to describe it in one word, what would it be?
Note that emotions don’t define who you are. Instead, they are experienced by all humans. Everybody feels aversion and anxiety at some point in their lives.
Once you are aware of your feelings, share them with the other person. While this may require courage, it is a necessary step: It helps them empathise with you and understand what impact their behaviour had on you. Then attentively listen to the emotions the individual is sharing with you.
Step 3: Needs
In the NVC framework, needs are considered the real reason for the conflict. To discover them, ask yourself why you felt the way you did. What triggered the emotions you uncovered in the previous step? Is it your need for, say, recognition, respect, safety, or belonging? Be truthful with yourself and honestly reflect on your underlying motives and goals.
Sharing the needs helps you understand why you and the other individual acted the way you did and what drove your respective behaviour. This, in turn, enables you to empathise with each other; it makes it more likely to find a mutually agreeable solution that addresses the root cause of the conflict.
Take the scenario with the senior stakeholder again as an example. You might discover that your emotions are connected to your need for respect and recognition and the concern that your authority is undermined by the stakeholder. Similarly, you might learn that the other person’s behaviour is caused by work pressure and stress, together with the worry that their interests are being ignored.
Step 4: Requests
The final step is making and receiving a request. Clearly state what you want the other person to do. If the individual doesn’t fully understand what you are asking for, then it will be hard for them to action it. Additionally, use positive language and communicate the outcome you’d like to achieve. Refrain from stating what you don’t want. For example, instead of saying, “I don’t want you to speak rudely to me anymore,” say, “Please talk respectfully to me in the future even if you are stressed.” [7]
After having shared observations, feelings, and needs, you will hopefully be able to accept each other’s requests. The conflict has now been successfully resolved and you’ve rebuilt the relationship with the other person.
But if that’s not the case and the answer you hear is no, then don’t give up yet. Continue the conversation by asking the individual to share their reasons for declining your request. Ask what prevents them from saying yes and if they have any other suggestions or ideas that would help address your needs.
Alternatively, if you find that you have to decline the request, clearly explain why you cannot accept it and offer to explore more options to find a solution that works for both of you. If, however, you cannot resolve the conflict despite your best intentions, talk to your line manager and the HR department.
Summary: Toxic vs. Healthy Conflict
Conflict can be a blessing or a curse, depending on how we deal with it. Table 2 summarises the differences between destructive, toxic and, constructive, healthy conflict.
While having healthy conflicts is not always easy, it helps you foster innovation and (re-) build relationships. What’s more, reflecting on your underlying motives and needs can help you learn something new about yourself and grow as an individual.
Notes
[1] Please note that I assume that the conflict can be resolved by the people involved, unlike severe transgressions such as violence, sexual harassment, and discrimination. If you are in doubt, always talk to your line manager and human resources.
[2] The Tuckman model shows that teams have to learn to skilfully navigate conflict to perform well. Lencioni argues in his book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team that a lack of constructive conflict holds teams back and leads to artificial, unproductive harmony.
[3] Note that I focus on personal attitudes and behaviours in this article, and I intentionally ignore the organisational context and company culture. While they undoubtedly influence how conflicts are handled, the personal choices we make are more important in my experience. Having said this, if you work in a healthy work environment where people feel comfortable voicing divergent ideas and disagreements, then having constructive conflict will be easier.
[4] The advice below is based on my book How to Lead in Product Management. For more guidance, I recommend reading or listening to the book.
[5] Bruce Patton et al. call these beliefs truth assumption and intention invention in their book Difficult Conversations.
[6] The questions are based on Oren Jay Sofer’s book Say What You Mean.
[7] This method is an appreciative inquiry technique called flipping, which I discuss in more detail in my book How to Lead in Product Management.
Post a Comment or Ask a Question
3 Comments
I fully agree on “Additionally, use positive language and communicate the outcome you’d like to achieve,” as mentioned in Step 4.
For that matter: Why is this ever called “Non-Violent Communication”? This focuses on outcomes that you do not want to achieve …
Thanks for your comment, Eric. Marshall Rosenberg, the creator of the NVC framework, chose the term nonviolence “to refer to our natural state of compassion when violence has subsided from the heart,” as he explains in his book Nonviolent Communication. The approach is therefore sometimes also referred to as “Compassionate Communication.” Does this term resonate more with you?
I was already juggling with similar terms like “Empathic conversation”, and “Compassionate communication” certainly makes sense.
Thanks!