I received a call the other day from a business owner with an internal
business conflict.
“I have a general manager and a sales manager. The general manager
cannot stand to be in the same room with the sales manager,” John told me.
“Tell me more about your sales manager,” I asked.
“He was a consultant, and we thought that he made a good fit with our
company. He seemed to have a lot of contacts in the region.
It’s been two years now and, frankly, he has not increased our sales significantly,”
John said.
“What has brought the problem to a head?” I asked.
“The general manager has come to me in utter frustration and said it’s
either he or the sales manager. The sales manager has made noises about
a lawsuit if he is terminated. He’s over 60. My lawyer assures me the sales
manager has no case, but who needs a lawsuit?” John responded.
“Let me guess. Your GM is a by-the-book sort of fellow. Very
black and white. Has high expectations of employees and little tolerance
for chit-chat. At meetings, he wants people to get right to the bottom
line. Am I right?” I asked.
“Amazingly correct,” John said.
“And your sales guy talks a lot, likes to be around people, is not very
detailed oriented, does not get to the point, likes to hear himself talk,
and is not so great on follow-through,” I observed.
“Right again,” John said.
“Therein is your problem,” I said and went on to explain the basic conflict
dynamics in his company.
This business owner presented a classic internal business conflict arising
from two very different business value systems. The general manager
represented a value system based on hierarchy, accountability, objectivity,
competition, and results (meaning profits). The strength of this type
of manager is that the business is run efficiently and as profitably as possible.
Nevertheless, people with his values, if not properly trained, are not the
greatest at managing people. They see the “human” side of people as
touchy-feely and irrelevant to the harsh realities of the business world.
In contrast, the sales manager represented a value system based on relationships,
communication, and attachments to others. Results are secondary to
friendships. The strength of this manager is in building relationships,
which is the heart of any business. People with these values, however,
fail to balance relationships with the need to be financially productive and
accountable.
This conflict was consequently based on two value systems colliding with
each other. Neither manager could understand the other and became irritated,
annoyed, frustrated, and outright angry at the continuing behavior of the
other. To each manager, it seemed as if the other was intentionally
provocative, disrespectful and insulting. Finally, the conflict erupted
into hostile exchanges and a complete break down of the business relationship.
Under these circumstances, one or the other or both leave the company.
Sometimes, the lower ranked manager may file a lawsuit claiming discrimination
based on harassment and a pervasive, hostile work environment.
Fortunately, these conflicts can be resolved peacefully if they are not
allowed to fester and escalate for too long. The key to de-escalation
is to create an environment where the managers can have a very necessary
and difficult conversation under safe conditions. The safety is provided
by an independent and impartial peacemaker, whose presence shields the conversation
in statutory confidentiality and whose process expertise controls the discussion.
The conversation will be about perceptions, values, injustices and finally
interests. Through a carefully orchestrated process, the parties gain
some understanding of the hidden factors influencing their conflict.
As they gain understanding, they are then faced with a two-choice dilemma:
Do I change a little and become more flexible, tolerant and forgiving, or
do I leave? Most of the time, managers chose the former. Sometimes,
they chose to leave. However, because they are making the choice to
leave with a much better understanding of the cause of dissension, the likelihood
of a later lawsuit is greatly reduced.
These internal conflicts are normal, predictable, and resolvable if they
are addressed rather than ignored. Unfortunately, since many companies
have an implicit policy of repressing or avoiding conflicts, differences
in business values can roil out of control. For business owners, management
of these common conflicts consists of two ideas. First, do not react
to conflict between managers with denial, avoidance or dismissal. This is
serious stuff and needs to be treated as such. Second, find outside help
as soon as you are aware of a problem. Like the guy in the auto shop
commercial used to say, “Pay me now, or pay me later.” Getting help
is not a sign of weakness or incompetence; it is a sign of enlightened management.
Douglas E. Noll, Esq. is a lawyer specializing in peacemaking and mediation
of difficult and intractable conflicts throughout California. His
firm, Noll Associates is based in Central California. He may be
reached through his website
and email at
doug@nollassociates.com