Teaching negotiation skills to overcome workplace conflict

Image taken from t1businesstraining.co.uk

When we think of training our staff in negotiation skills, we often have some fixed ideas of how these will be applied. Perhaps we are looking at making our managers more effective in negotiating contracts with staff or clients. Alternatively, we may want to increase the ability of sales staff to close deals with the best possible result. Within the wider sector, we may think about labor unions and management negotiating wage deals and even wider still, countries negotiating peace deals.

image taken from www.haartelz.com

In my early career as a therapist, I began to see the value in applying negotiation skills to the resolution of marriage and family conflicts. I would often see family members stuck in their particular mindsets, firing bullets at each other as they sought to persuade the other person of the rightfulness of their position. A regular phrase that I would hear would be, "I just don't get why they can't see my point of view?"

It was the classic book on negotiation skills, "Getting to Yes, Negotiating Agreement without Giving In" by Fisher and Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Department (1981) that provided a process for principled negotiation, that helped to equip those undergoing therapy with an ability to be solution focused and neither hard nor soft on the players. On a similar basis, it is interesting that by 1987, "Getting to Yes" was being used in some schools in the USA to teach students non-adversarial bargaining.(wikipedia: Getting_to_Yes). Among the greatest and most liberating principles used by true negotiators are those of generating options and being able to truly understand the other person's bottom line or goals. I have watched many couples walk away having resolved their conflict by identifying solutions that neither of them had even thought of at the outset of their discussions.

As discussed in an earlier blog, conflict between staff members is a major drain on the morale, culture and even economic resources of businesses across the globe. Some mitigation can occur by vetting new staff to maximize the fit of prospective members into the workplace culture. However carefully we recruit, workplace conflict is inevitable, particularly in work environments with highly motivated, intelligent and assertive individuals where confidence can sometimes turn to "I want it done my way." 

Some organizations place a great deal of pressure on managers to resolve staff conflicts, to act as the peacemakers. However, using managers to put out emotionally charged fires between staff is not the best use of management time. It distracts management from working towards achieving organizational goals. Additionally, once resolving a conflict is in the hands of a third and more senior party, it can actually enflame the situation, making it much larger than it needed to be. One of the key principles of conflict resolution is that it needs to be handled at the lowest possible level for the greatest chance of success. 

What if all staff were trained "negotiators" and were individually given the skills to seek out win-win solutions in every aspect of their work? If your organization is experiencing any level of down time because of anger and unresolved conflicts in the workplace then it would be a sound investment to train ALL staff in negotiation skills. Staff would be upskilled to handle their own personal issues directly with any other staff member and work on solutions. 

Being solution focussed in staff relations would have a flow-on effect to other parts of the business or organization. Both workers and management would be much more able to break free of pre-conceived notions or judgements about their work and become more innovative, more creative in overcoming all kinds of obstacles that previously stumped them. It becomes a way of thinking, constantly generating ideas and new solutions, looking beyond the obvious. True negotiation skills involve freeing the mind in relationships but this freedom extends to all other aspects of our existence.

"Love Languages in Business" -Looking at Dan Price's offer

Recently, we have witnessed much discussion about the actions of CEO Dan Price of Gravity taking a massive pay cut to enable the increase the pay of his staff. Feedback has been wildly swinging from calling him a hero to calling him crazy. It is true that this act was more than just a boosting of his staff salaries. This was a very clear message about reducing the disparity between the CEO position and his staff, about being seen more as a "team". The message is "We are all in this together".

Dan Price (Image from Gravity Payments Facebook page)

Feedback on Dan Price's action has focussed a great deal on the socio-political implications more than it merely being an act of throwing money at his employees to boost their connection with the organization. Some have decried it as a socialist move that will go horribly wrong. What does the research say about the potential for this move to succeed?

 In 2014 TINYhr published a very revealing Employee Engagement and Organizational culture report with some interesting findings on the topic of worker satisfaction. It was a sizeable study with over 200,000 anonymous responses to the survey, giving it some credibility. You can read the results here at  http://www.tinyhr.com/2014-employee-engagement-organizational-culture-report. While I don't want to repeat everything they had to say in this study, it is worthwhile discussing the basic findings in relation to this audacious offer by Dan Price.

In summary, the survey showed that the number one motivator for employees was not money but relationship with peers or the camaraderie between employees. On the same track, only half of all employees who responded were satisfied with their supervisors and a telling two thirds of employees reported that the organization in which they worked lacked a strong culture. Only 21% of employees felt valued by their employers. The TINYhr report noted, their findings matched the worldwide Gallup poll that found that only 13% of employees were engaged in or felt connected to their work. It is true that the United States and Canada fared better in this survey but there were still a massive 72% of workers who were either not engaged or actively disengaged in their work. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/165269/worldwide-employees-engaged-work.aspx)

So when we put these findings together with what Dan Price has offered his employees, there are some unanswered questions as to whether his offer will produce the desired results. These are questions that need to be answered before other CEOs rush out there and make similar offers. What impact did Price's offer have on the culture within Gravity between employees and between management and staff? Do staff feel more valued and recognized as a result of this offer? Even if this has some impact, will this have a long-lasting impression on staff motivation? In other words, are there mechanisms in place, both formal and casual, by which Gravity staff feel valued and recognized apart from monetary compensation and a reduction in the disparity in salaries with their CEO?

Even with all of these more global discussions about organization-wide expectations and attitudes, it is unwise for employers to consider that each individual worker is motivated by the same things. Not all employees will necessarily react the same way within Gravity to Price's offer. Just as Dr. Gary Chapman has become popular with his concept of the "Five Love Languages", workplaces would do well to investigate what motivates each and every individual employee to be engaged in their work. Monetary compensation? Recognition? Personal fulfilment and ideological satisfaction? Participation in decision making processes? Relationships with their co-workers? What processes do we have in place to determine the factors that motivate employees?

I will be keeping an interested eye on developments over at Gravity, not because of the sensationalism brought about by Dan Price's offer but because I am interested to learn more about how such a move impacts other factors in the satisfaction of his staff in the longer term and therefore the implications for other workplaces.




\

Motivation to do the hard things in life: Lessons from Sniffy the Rat

image from animalgals.wordpress.com

To provide some context to this particular blog, I am the kind of person who would scream when I would see a mouse run across the room. During a therapy session I was having with a couple, I spotted this mouse run across the back of their chairs at this inopportune moment when they were in the middle of sharing some intense personal emotions. My own emotions at seeing the mouse got the better of me and within seconds, both me and the woman client were standing on our chairs screaming to the amusement of the husband in this piece. I don't want to enter into any discussion about the possible sexism this implies. It was what it was.

I counter this piece with an experience I had with one of my children's pets. When her Dad brought home a pet rat for my daughter's birthday some time ago, she was delighted and I was somewhat shell shocked. Hmmm a pet rat in the house? For the sake of my daughter, Sniffy became very much part of the family including chewing on our net curtains that stupidly floated into the cage with the wind, or finding holes in the girls' clothing because they had let him and his voracious teeth loose in their drawers. My daughters and son would walk around the house with him on their shoulders or arms often. One sad day, Sniffy became very ill and the veterinarian told us there was only one hope that he would survive. The treatment would entail someone (read here, me) injecting Sniffy twice a day with this medication in his tiny neck.

As a family we all looked after Sniffy at that time and I dutifully held him gently and injected him with the required medication twice a day. Unfortunately, despite 24 hr care Sniffy didn't make it. Looking back on this scenario some years later, I learned something about myself, something about which I have needed reminding. I ask myself, "How on earth did I do that?" This was not a task of my choice, it was a task that should have seen my fears incapacitating me or at the very least have me run!

My answer not only speaks to me personally but I believe can also be applied in our working lives. I was able to do it because of how much I cared for my daughter, wanting to give her the maximum support possible. My emotional attachment to my daughter outweighed my desire to run from the task. There have been many occasions like this one in my life that have reinforced this concept. Love overcomes fear, emotional attachment outweighs inertia.

How can this apply in an organizational or business setting? Although a relationship between a parent and their child is not something that we usually experience in the workplace, if we were able to get emotionally connected not only to our work itself but also to our peers, then we would be able to go above and beyond ourselves and our pre-set limitations. It would confirm previous studies that show that connections between peers or colleagues is the most important factor to increase motivation (see my previous blog). 

A final anecdote to illustrate this point: A family member works within the IT industry. In my most objective judgement possible (which you may question at will), this person is simply brilliant at software development. He was explaining that he is doing an extraordinary number of hours work at the moment (75 hours he told me for last week) because the pressure is really on to get a particular piece of work done. I asked him why he allowed himself to be worked so hard by the firm that has employed him. His answer? This contract was important and he did not want to let his colleagues down. He has developed an emotional attachment and sense of responsibility to the people with whom he works and therefore, by extension, to how much he is willing to do. While we might want to encourage some thought about balance between work and personal life and not expecting people to revolve their lives around their work in this instance, understanding his motivation is nonetheless useful.

By the way, as a postscript, I would still scream if I saw a mouse running across the floor! 

Employee performance: A case for accountability

Great resources are often expended in identifying the right employee to fill roles within our organizations. However, all of the pre-employment tests, interviews and checking of references do not guarantee that we will get the best results from our employees.  Developing processes for monitoring (note that I did not say "measuring") performance in our organizations is an essential part of being effective in achieving our goals and objectives.

This blog is about trying to find a balance between a laissez-faire approach to management and micromanaging, particularly in a staff of highly skilled and qualified individuals. How do we develop accountability while at the same time not giving the impression that we are breathing down the necks of our staff? How do we balance the needs of the individual staff member with the need for team cohesiveness. The following are a few (not exhaustive) suggestions. I welcome your feedback on any others you may offer.

 1. Communicating expectations and roles clearly 
A beginning point for enhancing employee performance is clarity of roles and expectations. Sound recruitment processes usually include the development of a job description that clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities to the prospective employees. These job descriptions then form the basis for performance appraisals, particularly if they are articulated further within an employment contract. However, job descriptions (and any consequent employment contract) on their own are very two dimensional and lack context. Very few positions work in isolation and there are always boundary issues where roles overlap and/or meet. Once a person is employed, they need to be given clarity about where they fit within the organization and how their role contributes to the whole vision. This not only minimizes confusion and wasted resources but also may provide staff with motivation, knowing they are playing an important role within the wider organization.

Where possible, such definition of roles, including boundaries between staff, should be in writing. Who can remember everything they have been told in a verbal briefing? These are also living documents to be regularly reviewed as roles develop and relationships change.

2. Building an organizational culture
Organizational development theory advances the benefits for organizational performance when employees are built into cohesive, united working units. These unified teams are produced not only via exercises where we all figure out how to get a giant log from point A to point B across obstacles but more crucially via:

• identifying common organizational goals
• the ongoing ability to define working relationships between team members
• putting mechanisms in place for gathering and analyzing feedback from all staff 
• a process for staff members to be part of determining solutions to organizational issues

Having been a little cynical in my comment about the log moving exercise, I should add that teams appear to forge strong bonds when members are jointly involved in solving problems and working through project difficulties together. I believe that the results will be more long-lasting for a business or nonprofit when that project has some meaning or relationship to the goals of the organization. Whatever goal is set for the organization as a whole needs to be integrated into the psyche of each staff member and owned by them as much as by management.

3. Identifying mechanisms for accountability
One of the most common mechanisms for incorporating accountability that I have witnessed in organizational assessments I have completed has been the annual performance appraisal. This has sometimes taken on gargantuan proportions as an exercise by including 360 feedback processes, self-assessments and a range of  interviews. The concept of reviewing past objectives and in establishing new ones for the year ahead are laudable principles but a year is too long as a primary tool for accountability. A great deal can go wrong in a year. I have witnessed one nonprofit eat through all of its reserves of $1million in one year and become indebted another million dollars. I saw another significant nonprofit implode in that time frame through poor management.

Accountability mechanisms should be built into the day to day functioning of an organization, a natural part of the work flow. What does this look like? Examples may be weekly face to face or virtual meetings where staff contribute those aspects that went well in that week and obstacles they faced. They do not need to be lengthy exercises but should enable all levels of the organization to remain on top of developments. You might even consider a daily check in of 15 minutes as a planning and review exercise to prioritize the day. Management would profit greatly from making these conversations open ones between all staff and encouraging a spirit of cooperation so that all members feel free about offering solutions to overcoming obstacles.

Image copied from topofmind.com

In some organizations time constraints and the nature of projects dictate that staff work more individually. In these instances, management may identify smaller tasks that can be completed as a team so that overall vision and unity is maintained. It is a tough task keeping employees aligned to the organization's goals and overall vision if they are working completely in isolation or having a working relationship with only their supervisor. During a talk I heard from a pilot, he described that even being one degree off the flight path can result in a plane being hundreds of miles from the intended destination. Regularly checking in to recalibrate and keep in alignment with the team as a whole will pay dividends for any organization. Keeping staff on the same wavelength or engaging them in a small project will build personal relationships between staff which will be valuable during any times of potential conflict at a later time. Such an exercise could assist management to identify potential problems between staff members as they try to work together on something, a kind of mini-lab. This does not have to be a project directly related to the goals of the organization but could also be a service project for example.

Image copied from customerthink.com

There will naturally be differences between organizations that are project based, producing products or providing ongoing services. Projects lend themselves well to milestone assessment but ongoing services can also be creative about developing milestones that can be assessed. I highly recommend the process of Outcome mapping (http://www.outcomemapping.ca/) for determining those milestones in nonprofit organizations and for identifying boundary partners.

4. "Consequences" for Performance
While staff work at unique speeds and skill levels, to truly enhance organizational effectiveness there need to be specific consequences that are understood and enforced. These range from rewards for great performance to deciding on consequences for non-performance. At this point, management needs to identify these at a very individual level because those "consequences" that motivate one will not work as well with another. We might consider finding a parallel within the business sector for the "5 Love Languages" by Dr Gary Chapman (1995) used in intimate relationships. We need to pay attention to research on what languages individual employees use to feel rewarded and motivated for their work (the subject of another blog?)

In summary, being able to maximize staff performance should follow some key principles: Clarity of roles both individually and in relation to others in the organization, building a strong, unified organizational culture, identifying processes for introducing accountability for achieving organizational goals and finally finding some way of tying success or otherwise towards those goals with consequences or results that are individual to the employee.