Balancing Work Issues and
Family is a Key Issue for Families Today
Many people are facing a
time-crunch and are running hard to earn a
living and care for children and elderly
parents. There is however, essential
ingredients needed to facilitate work-family
harmony. The key ingredients are the American
peoples’ clear commitment to family and a bold
history of bringing together diverse groups to
develop mutually beneficial and unique
solutions to difficult work issues and work
related problems. There are practical steps,
which make economic and business sense, that
will help employers, families, and employees
respond positively to this work/family issue.
Most work-related
issues and problems
experienced can be resolved quickly,
informally, and fairly at the level at which
they arise.
Statistics estimate that
stress-related disorders due to overwork cost
American business $20 billion dollars a year.
Employers face the following realities:
• At least a quarter of work issues are the
result of employees having to manage
responsibilities both at home and at work.
• Reduced work performance, increased
absenteeism, higher turnover rates and poor
morale have all been linked to the conflict
between work and family responsibilities.
• The single most significant reason behind
the increased rates of absenteeism in recent
years is the need to handle family
responsibilities.
What are the major
realities in respect to work-family issues?
In answering this question, the following
points emerged:
• Conflict, tension, and stress arising from a
lack of balance between work and family are
experienced by a large percentage of people
who are in the paid labor force.
• The issue is both simple and complex. It
exists primarily because a majority of those
family members who have traditionally been in
charge of caregiving (care of children; care
of elderly parents) are now in the paid labor
force. Further, the issue currently has
greater magnitude and complexity because of
the ageing of the population and the major
restructuring of work that is under way. In
short, we are living through massive changes
in the nature of work, due to computerization
and globalization, and in the nature of the
family, due to the participation of women in
the paid labor force.
• The lack of balance in work and family will
increase and cause even more difficulties if
we do not deal with it effectively – there is
strong evidence that the trend towards the
dual-earner family is irreversible. A variety
of evidence shows that women are in the paid
labor force to stay. To begin with, research
on what women want shows their desire to make
it easier to combine work and family, not to
abdicate paid work. Further, our economy is
dependent on women being in jobs and/or small
businesses – it now takes 77 weeks of paid
employment at average wages to cover the
typical expenses of an American family. A
recent study estimates that the expense of
raising a child to age 18 is $627,492.
• Although women’s lives are strongly affected
by work-family issues, this is not a women’s
issue. Men experience extensive work-family
stress. As James Levine reports, "When
companies have actually surveyed their male
employees about work-family conflict – which
they have only recently started to do – their
level of work-family conflict turns out to be
as great as for the female employees."
• Recognition of the dual-earner family does
not mean that most young children should
necessarily be in non-parental care. Many
Western European countries have developed
economies based on the dual-earner family and
a system of parental leaves.
• Employers and employees are not alone in
confronting the increased stress, fatigue,
absenteeism and productivity costs that arise
out of unresolved work-family tension and
conflict. The lack of balance between work and
family is pervasive through all of North
America and Western Europe.
• The lack of balance between work and family
has a negative impact on employees, family
members of employees, employers, owners and
managers.
• There is a two-sided reality with respect to
jobs and opportunities. One side is that some
employers are unable to hire skilled people
for better paying permanent jobs. Some of
these employers react by requesting em-employees
to work long hours. Others are using the
shortage of skilled employees to implement
changes which give them competitive advantage
in retaining employees – by developing work
environments that are supportive of staff,
including those with family responsibilities.
The other side of this reality is that many
employees in the province would like better,
more challenging and more secure jobs. These
people, while trying to pay the bills for
their families, are often juggling split
shifts and/or part-time jobs and, therefore,
often see balance between work and family as
beyond their reach.
• The latest findings on the importance of
affection and stimulation on the development
of a child’s brain in the first years of life
suggest we will lose our capacity to function
effectively in the knowledge-based economy if
we do not pay more attention to the quality of
care children receive.
Problem Resolution Process
- Resolving Work
Issues and Conflict
with Work Teams
As organizations continue to restructure to
work teams, the need for training in conflict
resolution will grow. Conflict arises from
differences, and when individuals come
together in teams, their differences in terms
of power, values, and attitudes contribute to
the creation of conflict. To avoid the
negative consequences that can result from
disagreements, most methods of resolving
conflict stress the importance of dealing with
disputes quickly and openly. Conflict is not
necessarily destructive, however. When managed
properly, conflict can result in benefits for
a team.
Resolving Conflict with Work Teams
A major advantage a team has over an
individual is its diversity of resources,
knowledge, and ideas. However, diversity also
produces conflict. As more and more
organizations restructure to work teams the
need for training in conflict resolution will
continue to grow. Varney (1989) reports that
conflict remained the number-one problem for
most of the teams operating within a large
energy company, even after repeated training
sessions on how to resolve conflict and how to
minimize the negative impact on team members.
One reason for this may be that mangers and
other leaders within organizations are not
giving the issue of resolving conflict enough
attention. Varney's research showed that
although most managers are aware of
disagreements and have received training in
conflict resolution, they seldom assign a high
priority to solving conflict problems. With
this in mind, it is critical that team members
possess skills to resolve conflict among
themselves.
Conflict arises from differences. When
individuals come together in work teams their
differences in terms of power, values and
attitudes, and social factors all contribute
to the creation of conflict. It is often
difficult to expose the sources of conflict.
Conflict can arise from numerous sources
within a team setting and generally falls into
three categories: communication factors,
structural factors and personal factors
(Varney, 1989). Barriers to communication are
among the most important factors and can be a
major source of misunderstanding.
Communication barriers include poor listening
skills; insufficient sharing of information;
differences in interpretation and perception;
and nonverbal cues being ignored or missed.
Structural disagreements include the size of
the organization, turnover rate, levels of
participation, reward systems, and levels of
interdependence among employees. Personal
factors include things such as an individual's
self-esteem, their personal goals, values and
needs. In order for conflict to be dealt with
successfully, managers and team members must
understand its unpredictability and its impact
on individuals and the team as a whole.
Conflict in work teams is not necessarily
destructive, however. Conflict can lead to new
ideas and approaches to organizational
processes, and increased interest in dealing
with problems. Conflict, in this sense, can be
considered positive, as it facilitates the
surfacing of important issues and provides
opportunities for people to develop their
communication and interpersonal skills.
Conflict becomes negative when it is left to
escalate to the point where people begin to
feel defeated, and a combative climate of
distrust and suspicion develops (Bowditch &
Buono, 1997). Nelson (1995) cautions that
negative conflict can destroy a team quickly,
and often arises from poor planning. He offers
this list of high potential areas from which
negative conflict issues commonly arise:
Administrative Procedures: If the team lacks
good groundwork for what it's doing, its
members will not be able to coordinate their
work.
People Resources: If the team does not have
enough resources to do the job, it is
inevitable that some will carry too heavy a
load. Resentment, often unexpressed, may
build, so it is crucial that team leaders
ensure adequate resources.
Cost overruns: Often inevitable, cost overruns
become a problem when proper measures are not
taken. The whole team should know early on
when cost becomes a problem so additional
funding can be sought by the team. This way
the problem can be resolved before it grows
into a problem for management.
Schedules: The schedule is highly
consequential to the team's project and should
be highly visible. All members should be
willing to work together to help each other
meet their deadlines.
Responsibilities: Each team member must know
what areas are assigned and who is accountable
for them.
Wish Lists: Stick to the project at hand and
avoid being sidetracked into trying to fit
other things into it. Wait and do the other
things you would like to do after successful
completion of the original project.
Team members can and should attempt to avoid
negative conflict from occurring. Being aware
of the potential for negative conflict to
occur, and taking the necessary steps to
ensure good planning will help.
Handling Negative Conflict
When negative conflict does occur there are
five accepted methods for handling it: Direct
Approach, Bargaining, Enforcement, Retreat,
and De-emphasis (Nelson, 1995). Each can be
used effectively in different circumstances.
1. Direct Approach: This may be the best
approach of all. It concentrates on the leader
confronting the issue head-on. Though conflict
is uncomfortable to deal with, it is best to
look at issues objectively and to face them as
they are. If criticism is used, it must be
constructive to the recipients. This approach
counts on the techniques of problem-solving
and normally leaves everyone with a sense of
resolution, because issues are brought to the
surface and dealt with.
2. Bargaining: This is an excellent technique
when both parties have ideas on a solution yet
cannot find common ground. Often a third
party, such as a team leader, is needed to
help find the compromise. Compromise involves
give and take on both sides, however, and
usually ends up with both walking away equally
dissatisfied.
3. Enforcement of Team Rules: Avoid using this
method if possible, it can bring about hard
feelings toward the leader and the team. This
technique is only used when it is obvious that
a member does not want to be a team player and
refuses to work with the rest. If enforcement
has to be used on an individual, it may be
best for that person to find another team.
4. Retreat: Only use this method when the
problem isn't real to begin with. By simply
avoiding it or working around it, a leader can
often delay long enough for the individual to
cool off. When used in the right environment
by an experienced leader this technique can
help to prevent minor incidents that are the
result of someone having a bad day from
becoming real problems that should never have
occurred.
5. De-emphasis: This is a form of bargaining
where the emphasis is on the areas of
agreement. When parties realize that there are
areas where they are in agreement, they can
often begin to move in a new direction.
Managing Cooperative Conflict
Though we often view conflict through a
negative lens, teams require some conflict to
operate effectively. Cooperative conflict can
contribute to effective problem solving and
decision making by motivating people to
examine a problem. Encouraging the expression
of many ideas; energizing people to seek a
superior solution; and fostering integration
of several ideas to create high-quality
solutions (Tjosvold, 1988). The key is to
understand how to handle it constructively. If
members understand how to do it, differences
that arise can result in benefits for a team.
While it is true that suppressed differences
can reduce the effectiveness of a team, when
they are brought to the surface, disagreements
can be dealt with and problems can be
resolved. The actual process of airing
differences can help to increase the
cohesiveness and effectiveness of the team
through the increased interest and energy that
often accompanies it. This in turn fosters
creativity and intensity among team members.
In addition, bringing differences to the
surface can result in better ideas and more
innovative solutions. When people share their
views and strive toward reaching a consensus,
better decisions are reached. Team members
also improve their communication skills and
become better at understanding and listening
to the information they receive when
differences are freely aired.
Tips for
improving listening skills:
Listen for meaning.
Understanding is not agreeing.
Seek clarification before responding, if
needed.
Apply listening skills when receiving a
message.
Evaluate yourself for how well you listened at
the end of any conversation.
The tension of well-managed conflict allows
teams to confront disagreement through healthy
discussion and improve the decisions made (Rayeski
& Bryant, 1994). This leads to greater team
efficiency and effectiveness. Effectively
managing conflict allows teams to stay focused
on their goals. Swift and constructive
conflict management leads to a broader
understanding of the problem, healthy
expression of different ideas or alternatives,
and creates excitement from the positive
interaction and involvement which will help
the team through periods of transition and on
to greater levels of performance.
As teams become more responsible for managing
themselves, it is important for organizations
to help them by identifying the knowledge,
skills, and abilities (KSAs) required to
handle conflict. Then developing plans to
transfer these skills and capabilities over to
their teams. Because conflict is inevitable in
teams, the focus needs to be on how it is
managed. Conflict that is poorly handled
creates an environment of fear and avoidance
of the subject. On the other hand, if properly
managed, it can lead to learning, creativity,
and growth.
Team Resolution Process
Rayeski and Bryant (1994) recommend using the
Team Resolution Process to handle conflict
when it occurs in teams. Conflict should first
be handled on an informal basis between the
individuals involved. This, they say, will
allow time for resolution or self-correction
by the individuals. If the conflict remains
unsettled, a mediator can be brought in to
help resolve the situation. If resolution is
still not achieved the dispute should be
openly discussed in a team meeting. A formal
discipline process needs to occur, if
resolution is not achieved after being
addressed at the team level.
The escalating
process of Team Resolution is as follows:
1. Collaboration (One-on-one): Handle the new
problem person-to-person. Use as many facts as
possible and relate the issue to customer,
team, or organizational needs. Be open and
honest and conduct the session in a private
setting. Document the concerns or issues, the
dates, and the resolution, if any, and have
both parties sign it.
2. Mediation (One-on-one with Mediator): If
collaboration did not work or was
inappropriate, handle the problem with a
mediator. The mediator must be trained in
conflict resolution, understand policy and
ethics, be trusted by the team, and have the
ability to remain neutral. Gather facts and
talk over the issue with the people involved.
Bring up as many facts as possible and relate
the issue to customer, team, or organizational
needs. Be open and honest and conduct the
mediation session in private. Document it and
have all parties sign.
3. Team Counseling: The conflict is now a
definite issue to the team. Collaboration
and/or Mediation could not be done, were not
appropriate, or did not work. Handle the
conflict at a team meeting; put the problem on
the next agenda and invite the necessary
individuals. Again, bring up the facts, relate
the issue to customer, team, or organizational
needs. Be open and honest, discuss it in a
private setting, document it, and have all
parties sign it. Anyone on the team can put an
issue or problem on the team agenda, however,
this step should be used only after
Collaboration, and Mediation has been ruled
out.
Because every team is different, disputes that
arise will be too. However, Stulberg (1987)
recognizes patterns common to all
controversies.
The Five-P's of Conflict
Management:
1. Perceptions: People associate
conflict with negative responses such as
anger, fear, tension, and anxiety. Rarely do
we perceive any benefits from being involved
in a dispute. Our negative perceptions impact
our approach in resolving conflict as we
strive to eliminate the source of these
negative feelings.
2. Problems: Anyone can be involved in
a conflict, and the amount of time, money, and
equipment needed for resolution will vary
according to its complexity.
3. Processes: There are different ways
to go about resolving disputes: Suppress the
conflict, give in, fight, litigate, mediate,
etc.
4. Principles: We determine the
priorities of all resolution processes on the
basis of an analysis of our fundamental values
regarding efficiency, participation, fairness,
compliance, etc.
5. Practices: Power, self-interest, and
unique situations are all factors relating to
why people resolve disputes the way they do.
Stulberg proposed these patterns as an aid for
formal mediators, but anyone dealing with
conflict can benefit from understanding the
elements common to disagreements.
Negotiation
Although there are common patterns, there
is no one best way to deal with conflict.
Disputes arise for different reasons and every
team is unique. Varney (1989) proposes that
negotiation is the most effective response to
conflict when both parties stand to gain
something, each has some power, and there is
interdependency. Negotiation offers
flexibility and viability other responses,
such as Avoidance, Confrontation, and
Diffusion lack. The process of negotiation
involves listening to both sides, seeking out
common areas of interest and agreement, and
building on them so that individuals can
understand each other's points of view. Varney
believes there are four essential skills team
leaders need to learn and apply to effectively
resolve disagreements using the negotiation
process:
Diagnosis: Recognizing areas of
understanding and areas of differences.
Initiation: Bringing the disagreements
to the surface.
Listening: Hearing not only what the
other person is saying, but the Emotional
aspects as well.
Problem Solving: A process with
numerous steps including data gathering,
Considering its impact, examining
alternatives, identifying solutions, and
developing a plan of action.
In order to resolve their differences, Varney
(1989) recommends bringing the parties
together and, with the assistance of a third
party, asking the following questions:
What is the problem, as you perceive it?
What does the other person do that contributes
to the problem?
What do you want or need from the other
person?
What do you do that contributes to the
problem?
What first step can you take to resolve the
problem?
Each party should be questioned while the
other listens, asking questions only for
clarification. Then the parties discuss a
mutual definition and understanding of the
problem. They should be allowed to express
their feelings and get hostility out of their
systems at this stage, but both parties must
be willing to admit partial responsibility for
the problem. This requires good listening, low
defensiveness, and an ability to stay in a
problem-solving mode. Agreement should be
reached on what steps will be taken to resolve
the problem, and should be put in writing in
order to prevent later misunderstandings.
The key to Varney's negotiation process is
exposing the different positions as early as
possible. If conflict is left to simmer and
then erupt into open warfare, it becomes much
more difficult to resolve. Revealing the
sources of conflict early on enables people to
understand the facts of the dispute, before
emotions get the upper hand, which may allow
them to more easily see their areas of
agreement. When agreement areas are
identified, people can then work toward
arriving at a consensus and develop a process
for resolving problems in the future.
Fisher et al. (1995) offers a similar
five-step approach to resolving conflict.
Acknowledge that the conflict exists. Gain
common ground by putting the conflict in
perspective with the goals and purpose of the
team. Seek to understand all angles of the
disagreement, keeping in mind that
understanding is different from agreement.
Attack the issue, not each other. Channel
anger and hostility into problem solving and
action planning.
Develop an action plan describing what each
person will do to solve the problem.
This method allows both parties to acknowledge
the nature of the conflict, then jointly work
toward resolving it. As with Varney's (1989)
approach, the key to this process is
responding quickly and effectively when
conflict presents itself. Teams are cautioned
to avoid covering up painful issues. Sooner or
later, unresolved issues tend to resurface,
often in uglier forms than before. Along the
same lines, teams should not automatically
defer an issue to management, as this
disempowers the team. Instead, they should
learn how to handle disputes themselves,
requesting help from management only when
their own attempts at resolution have failed.
Fisher et al. (1995) stress that team members
should be encouraged to voice their concerns
in team meetings rather than outside the team
setting, in an attempt to avoid what they call
the AParking Lot Commentary (p. 212). This
happens when team members are afraid to voice
feelings to the team so they begin to talk
about team issues in conversations with
individuals. When this occurs it undermines
the trust and integrity of the team.
Sources of Conflict Among Project Teams
Though the recognition that conflict can be
productive is not new ( for example, Coser,
1956; Deutsh, 1969), some of the conflict
issues that organizations are dealing with
are. For instance, one study (Kezsbom, 1992)
looked at sources of conflict among project
teams and found that the number one issue
developed from goals and priority issues.
Previous literature (Posner, 1986; Thamhain &
Wilemon, 1975) presented the number one source
of conflict as being disagreements over
schedules, which ranked at number seven in
Kezsbom's study. It makes sense that goals and
priority issues have risen on the list as
organizations have evolved into multi-project,
streamlined environments. In these new
complex, hybrid organizations, employees often
find themselves serving on a variety of
project teams, being led by a variety of
project mangers while reporting directly to
functional managers. This sets the stage for
Kezsbom's third conflict category:
communication and information flow. When
reporting relationships are complex it becomes
more difficult to share information.
Personality and interpersonal issues, ranked
in the number two category by those in high
technology environments, presented another
dramatic change from previous studies. This
change may be related to the increased use of
cross-functional, self-directed teams in which
individuals with technical backgrounds must
rely on the work of others to get their own
work done. This specifically illustrates how
important it is to provide training in
communication and interpersonal skills to
cross-functional team members, while
emphasizing an appreciation of the value of
differences.
Overall, this study provides valuable insights
for organizations, project leaders, and
project team members. Because goal and
priority issues frequently change,
communication must be improved. Kezsbom (1992)
makes these recommendations:
More frequent and effective upward, downward,
and team communications.
More frequent meetings and status review
sessions to increase communication between
functions and minimize inconsistent
perceptions of project goals and priorities.
Increase human relations training and
facilitate more active team-building efforts.
Organizations must be aware that conflict
grows from differences, but so does
innovation. If project teams are properly
trained in human relations and team-building
skills, production and quality measures will
increase.
No matter what kind of team it is, no method
of managing conflict will work without mutual
respect and a willingness to disagree and
resolve disagreements. Donald Weiss, president
of Self-Management Communication, Inc.,
believes each person on the team must be
willing to take the following four steps when
a team meeting erupts into a storm (Weiss,
1997): listen, acknowledge, respond, and
resolve remaining differences.
Listen: To hear what someone else is
saying is not the same as listening. To listen
effectively means clearing your mind of
distractions and concentrating not only on the
words but also on nonverbal gestures, which
often convey ninety percent of what the person
is trying to say. When resolving
disagreements, you often have to deal with
feelings first.
Acknowledge: You can acknowledge
people's positions without agreeing with them.
Show this with statements like, "I understand
that you're angry," "If I understand you, you
think we should", or "Let's explore your
opinion further." You may still disagree with
them, but at least they know you've heard
them.
Respond: You've listened and
acknowledged what the other person is saying.
Now it is your turn to be heard. If you're
offering criticism of your teammate's ideas,
make sure it's constructive, and if you're
disagreeing with them, be ready to offer an
alternative. Be willing, also, to be
questioned or challenged, while avoiding
defensiveness when you answer. Resolve
remaining differences: Define the real problem
by looking for what's causing the
disagreement. Then analyze it into its
manageable parts. Now you can generate
alternative solutions to the problem and
select the alternative on which everyone can
agree.
For individuals to work effectively in
teams they must be able to clearly communicate
their ideas, to listen, and be willing to
disagree. Although it is difficult, learning
to appreciate each other's differences
reflects a team's ability to manage conflict.
When conflict occurs we must not turn our
backs and hope it will go away. Instead, we
must learn to tolerate it, even welcome it,
for well-managed conflict can be the source of
change and innovation. As more and more
organizations attempt to make the difficult
transition to teams, they must develop and
provide programs for their employees which
offer training in conflict management skills
and techniques. I hope the ideas in this paper
can help organizations and their teams begin,
or continue, this challenging task.
Carole A. Townsley
Fresh
Tracks
- Team Building That Works
References:
Bowditch, J. L., Buono, A. F. (1997). A primer
on organizational behavior (4th ed.). New
York, NY: JohnWiley & Sons.
Coser, L. A. (1956). The functions of social
conflict. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.Deutsh,
M. (1969). Conflicts: Productive and
destructive. Journal of Social Issues, 25 (1),
7 - 41.
Fisher, K., Rayner, S., Belgard, W., (1995).
Tips for teams: A ready reference for solving
common team problems. New York: McGraw-Hill,
Inc.
Kezsbom, D. S. (1992). Re-opening Pandora's
box: Sources of project conflict in the >90s.
Industrial Engineering, 24 (5), 54 - 59.
Nelson, M. (1995). Interpersonal team
leadership skills. Hospital Material
Management Quarterly, 16 (4), 53 - 63.
Rayeski, E., & Bryant, J. D. (1994). Team
resolution process: A guideline for teams to
manage conflict, performance, and discipline.
In M. Beyerlein & M. Bullock (Eds.), The
International Conference on Work Teams
Proceedings: Anniversary Collection. The Best
of 1990 - 1994 (pp. 215 - 221). Denton:
University of North Texas, Center for the
Study of Work Teams.
Stulberg, J. B. (1987). Taking charge /
managing conflict. Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books.
Thamhain, H., & Wilemon, D. L. (1975).
Conflict management in project life cycles.
Sloan Management Review, 17 (3).
Varney, G. H. (1989). Building productive
teams: An action guide and resource book. San
Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass, Inc.
Weiss, D. H. (1997). Four steps for managing
team storms. Getting ResultsYFor the hands-on
Manager, 42 (7), 7.
I work with
successful leaders from all types of
organizations to create greater impact. I also
work with emerging leaders - talented
individuals who are just beginning to realize
how far they can go. Perhaps you want to
rethink your career altogether. Lilly will work
with you to decide which options are right for
you. Then based upon what you learn together, she
partners with you to develop your current
career or to transition into a new career.
FIRE YOUR BOSS?
Ready to move on -- but
not sure where and how?
Seeking a way to serve
your life purpose without taking a vow of
poverty?
Looking for a job?
Would you like to
work at home?
Ready to
stop wasting months, if not years, in a
career you've outgrown?
Job Seekers 
Free. Fast. Smart.
Post Your Resume FREE Today!
Search over 800,000 jobs, build and post your
resume and access thousands of pages of career
info and advice.
Employers 
Get
instant access to today's most powerful
hiring
tools --
post jobs, search resumes, screen
candidates and streamline your entire hiring
process.
|
