In today's business climate, the contrast between organizations that manage conflict in the workplace effectively and those that don't is wonderful. Organizations with neglected, ill-defined or immature conflict management approaches experience a host of undesirable effects, from reduced productivity and poor decisions to information suppression and gridlock. Sometimes, these escalate, causing stress and separation, disrupting working relationships and leading to hostilities, complaints or even legal action.

Organizations with mature approaches to conflict, conversely, create an environment that people perceive as fair and equitable. Different perspectives are included in decisions in an environment where conflicting information flows freely.

How can leaders ensure their organizations don't fall into the latter group? until Conflict management is a big topic, a few key things need to happen for the effort to be effective.

Connected: 6 Strategies to resolve conflicts at work

Understanding conflict theory

As with any phenomenon in the workplace, exploitation of conflict for positive results it requires a common way of describing its basic elements. We can begin by offering a definition of conflict that differs from the way people usually tend to view it. Rather than seeing conflict as inherently destructive, organizations with a mature approach define it as the presence of opinions or concerns that are at odds with each other. This diversity of opinion, they admit, is inherent in the human experience.

The internal struggle we see in organizations is only one way in which conflict is seen.

Researchers Ralph Kilmann and Ken Thomas identified five overarching ways people default when they approach conflict (disclosure: my firm sells the Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument). These can be understood in terms of how people apply different degrees of security and cooperation.

Competing: This safe and non-cooperative approach occurs when one side seeks a 100% win.

Accommodation: This is a non-aggressive, cooperative approach where one party lets the other get what they want.

Compromising: This is a somewhat persuasive, somewhat cooperative approach in which both sides get some, but not all, of what they want.

Avoiding: This indecisive and non-cooperative approach occurs when at least one party refuses to engage in the conflict.

Cooperation: This safe but collaborative way occurs when two or more parties take a problem-solving approach that listens to the concerns of all involved.

Collaboration differs in that it often produces a completely new solution from what might have been originally envisioned. It requires the greatest skill and practice. And while it's not suitable for every scenario, it tends to be the most underutilized. Not surprisingly, organizations with a mature approach in conflict they tend to use this way more often.

Identifying a team's conflict culture

Because of life and work experience, background, and innate psychological and personality preferences, people tend to default to one of these five conflict modes—usually without being aware of it. Similarly, they often don't think there might be other approaches, slipping into the mode that feels most comfortable to them.

Furthermore, based on the combination of conflict styles of its members, teams and organizations have a conflict culture. When this culture is not cultivated, conflict tends to be unproductive—even destructive.

Becoming aware and others aware, therefore, it is necessary for the development of the competence for dealing with conflicts. Increased awareness of conflict modes leads to a reduction in people's tendency to immediately strike defensive or offensive positions when conflicts arise. With strategic training and development, people's unconscious habits and assumptions become conscious and they gain perspective on their power of choice during conflict.

Moreover, their tendencies and behaviors in dealing with conflict can now be observed, measured and improved. Teams can choose the right approach to conflict, rather than defaulting to how they're used to handling it.

However, before this can begin, organizations must discover their conflict culture. For example, an organization may find that it is biased toward viewing conflict as a threat to teamwork. Others may learn that they tend to see it as a waste of time and resources that should be avoided. However, others may find that they are predisposed to see it as a threat to leadership authority and organizational stability. These perspectives can shape the culture in which employees work, fundamentally influencing whether they deal with conflict appropriately.

To develop more effective conflict management, we need to know our starting point. First, organizations must uncover their biases, assumptions, and perspectives on conflict. From here the steps towards a healthier culture can begin. Next, each team must build employees' skills in self-awareness and awareness of others through training and strategic development. Teams will then need help transitioning to the new behaviors.

Connected: 3 ways to use conflict to strengthen your startup

Choosing the best conflict approach

With this awareness comes the ability to choose the best mode of conflict for the scenario.

In general, collaboration produces superior decisions, especially when applied to complex issues. However, it takes time, so it may be wise to reserve it for critical situations where a favorable outcome or an innovative solution is required.

On the other hand, when there is not enough information to make a fair decision, avoiding conflict temporarily can be beneficial. It provides an opportunity to collect data, research or feedback from other interested parties. Once everyone is better informed, the conflict can be revisited with a higher probability of a productive resultminimizing the risk of decisions based on misunderstandings.

Even when the optimal way is chosen, it must be implemented effectively. This includes giving a team the necessary skills to successfully navigate conflict. These may include the ability to:

• Distinguish between people's concerns – what they are primarily motivated to achieve – and what positions or actions they are willing to take to satisfy their concerns.

• Define an issue about those concerns versus the attitudes that the parties involved initially take. Collaboration, for example, requires uncovering concerns beneath people's positions.

• Show a balance of durability and flexibility when trying to cooperate or accommodate, especially when the other party is stuck in Competitive mode.

Reducing the cost of conflict

A final consideration is that even when the conflict mode is best for the situation, it still has a cost. Effective conflict management involves minimizing this cost.

If a leader dismisses the significant consequences of a conflict as simply the price of making the right decision, this is a clue that he lacks conflict skills. A skilled leader can operate in Competitive mode without provoking co-workers, in Avoidant mode while not appearing to be dealing with important issues, or in Accommodating mode without appearing to be a pushover.

Connected: How to successfully manage and resolve conflict in your team

In conclusion, organizations with mature conflict management get to this point because senior leadership has made it a priority and invested in their conflict management culture and employees. Such organizations encourage the will to have fun opposing views and free exchange of information, and senior leadership sets an example by developing and demonstrating their conflict management skills.