How to manage conflicts to transform your organization
In startups, a seemingly small conflicts or challenges can be fatal to a company’s success.
Say a teammate misses a deadline and team members are frustrated. How this issue is resolved can impact individual egos, creativity and team dynamics irreparably.
These issues get more challenging when a “problematic” teammate is not the average line worker, but a senior expert who uses intellectual faculties to craft solutions. This type of mental work is not fostered through obligation and force, but requires inspiration and engagement for the best results.
So how do you confront challenges without alienating individuals or the team?
Let’s say, for example, the team member who misses a deadline is a senior engineer. If you approach Ms. Senior-Engineer from the mindset that she is the problem, your communication (words and Zoom facial expressions) will likely feel blaming and shaming.
With her psychological safety at risk, the senior engineer could become defensive and protective. Her consciousness contracts, becoming close-minded to change. From this state, the senior engineer could feel obligated to comply with the rules rather than feeling inspired to shift her overall communication.
In contrast, if the senior engineer is approached with the intention to explore the integrity of the whole team rather than her wrongdoing, the situation is an opportunity for transformation. From this paradigm, instead of making the senior engineer a hundred percent responsible for the breakdown, each person owns a hundred percent responsibility for creating a solution.
At ELEV^TE Venture Studio, we use a conceptual framework called “The Integrity Model,” which calls for leadership rather than control.
In fact, our team has one rule. We don’t have a 30-page handbook or an online system of how and when to do what. We have only 1 Golden Rule:
Lead in integrity in all situations.
Our mission is to “Grow leaders who catalyze human-centered ventures,” which means our teammates need to feel trusted as leaders and know how to center their humanness through these elements. If we expect that detailed handbook rules will reign in misdeeds, then we’re using an external moral compass to guide our team’s behavior.
On the flip side, many wrongdoings specified in handbooks go too far in limiting behavior and could risk expelling our most valued players on technicalities.
Indeed, it’s broad, but if our goal is to raise leaders then we need to allow for trust and experimental wiggle room. The phrase “Be in integrity” means that teammates must act mindfully towards what they value and align with those values. This approach requires teammates to hone their own intuition of team and personal alignment, imbuing them with trust and freedom.
Now as utopic as this sounds, we know organizing a group of people, working remotely, with tons of diverse skills and ways of thinking, will guarantee conflicts and challenges.
Hence, instead of assuming an individual is the problem, when a conflict or challenge occurs we assume that the cause is our organizational workflow — i.e. everyone — is the problem.
We rarely use the term problem when it comes to people because it means someone needs to be fixed. Rather, we call it “an integrity breakdown,” meaning “Exciting — it’s an opportunity to be better!”
That is, since communication is never one-sided, a miscommunication exposes flaws in how the organization is operating. Communication “problems” are the best opportunities to excel our organizational performance and transform our team dynamic — if handled with care, of course.
Rather than pasting on tactical changes, our paradigm shifts how we all relate to ourselves and the organization through the concept of integrity. Before we get to the process, let’s begin with what integrity means.
What is Integrity?
The root word of integrity is “integer,” which means whole number. In other words, integrity means wholeness, when what you stand for is aligned with your words, thoughts and actions to form one whole.
There are three key elements to consider:
1. Integrity is structural, meaning without a piece it will still work, but badly.
Think about integrity like structural alignment: are all the parts aligned individually and collectively — yes or no? If one piece is out of alignment, the other pieces will bear a heavier load. If misaligned, individual pieces will compensate for the others, causing deterioration over time, as well as the subsequent misalignment of the whole determines the lifespan of the structure.
Notably, a misalignment of one piece is not immediately fatal. In fact, if the piece is realigned quickly, it won’t cause too much damage. Yet, if this small misalignment is left exposed over time, breakdowns could snowball.
More simply, think of a bicycle wheel. If a wheel is missing a spoke, the wheel still works for a short time. Think how slow and painful it will be for the rider though.
In other words, a lack of integrity impacts the workability of the whole, i.e. the system as a whole will not work as well if there are incremental breakdowns.
Unlike a building, bike or industrial machine, an organization is not a tangible structure made of distinct pieces. Instead, an organization is made up of complex, emotional humans communicating intangible ideas to other complex, emotional humans. Rather than of sturdy bars connecting parts, humans only have communication to create movement. In the infinite contexts and meanings of language, miscommunications are then not as surprising, especially if English is anyone’s second language.
2. Integrity is factual, not moral.
In contrast to popular thought, integrity does not describe someone’s morality, meaning it does not signify good or bad value. For instance, if I say I’ll arrive at 5pm and I do not actually arrive till 5:20pm, I’m not necessarily a bad or good person for being 5 minutes late.
Integrity is factual: I arrived at 5pm or I did not. It is or it isn’t. What lateness means about my morality is irrelevant.
If individually and as an organization, for instance, we’re committed to effective communication and my teammate isn’t responding to my information requests, we’re out of integrity. Again, no one is bad or good, or deserving of blame or shame. Rather, we’re out of alignment with what we stand for. The best part: we can get curious about where we went out of alignment with our values.
Exploring, defining, and redefining words to align our team’s communication determines our performance.
3. Integrity is aspirational, which means we’ll never be perfectly in integrity.
In the integrity paradigm, if we collectively hold an aspiration like effective communication, we can use it as a foundation for realignment. Since we’re chaotic, ever-changing humans, however, complete integrity is impossible.
More important than the attainment of perfect integrity is sparking conversations about where and why we’re out of alignment. The mental model isn’t meant as an absolute — it’s a guide for how we lead ourselves to a resolution.
While traditional management paradigms require incident reports and punishment for problematic teammates, our goal is to restore alignment individually and collectively, having teammates embody their impact.
If we’re always out of integrity, it’s essential to focus instead on continuously restoring integrity.
How to Restore Integrity
There are three steps to this restoration of integrity, which you can abbreviate with the acronym “AIR”:
- Acknowledge misalignment of integrity.
- Empathize with the impact.
- Restore alignment.
Think about this process like “clearing the air” and use the acronym as a rough guide for what to include. By no means should this feel like a mechanical checklist.
Let’s use the beginning example with Ms. Senior-Engineer who missed a deadline.
ACKNOWLEDGE
Instead of shaming the senior engineer, this process starts with the impacted teammate (not the “blamed” person) acknowledging where their words and actions are out of alignment. An acknowledgment takes the form, “I committed to [words], but I did [actions].”
While this seems simple, we often struggle to see our integrity blindspots. Some questions you can ask to spark thinking: Where are you experiencing a breakdown? OR What kinds of challenges are you experiencing and where can you take responsibility?
This will sound like, “I committed to… effective communication, but I did… not check in with you to assure the requirements were clear.”
Notably, in an average apology, people stop with this step, neglecting to appreciate the impact they caused or create a new approach to moving forward. The following two steps clear the previous misalignment and restore integrity.
IMPACT
Step Two requires the speaker to exit their experience of the miscommunication and empathize with the other person’s experiences. Since lack of integrity always impacts the collective workability, empathizing takes the form, “My lack of integrity impacted our workability by… I imagine your experience was…”
In the above example, the impacted teammate could say something like, “My lack of integrity impacted our workability by not providing you all of the requirements for the deadline. I imagine your experience was confusion and maybe frustration in completing the assignment.”
To push for deeper empathy, a facilitator could probe further by asking, “What was the impact of that?” after each response. For instance, the impact of the confusion and frustration was insecurity and inability to complete the assignment. The impact of that was us not meeting the deadline. The impact of that was depleted morale, compromising the project, causing our team to lose money and time, and so on.
RESTORE
Finally in Step Three, the speaker restores alignment by identifying how they personally will move forward. This can take the form of “Moving forward,…”
In the above example, the impacted teammate could say, “Moving forward, I will check in with you the evening before the deadline to assure you have all of the information.” While this can feel mechanical and tactical, be sure to also re-commit to what you stand for. As a final send off from the meeting and to keep the morale high, stating your commitment allows integrity to be restored. For example, ask everyone to end with, for instance, “I re-commit… to effective communication.”
When an impacted party expresses their responsibility and vulnerability, everyone sees that this conversation is not about punishment or blame. Everyone’s state of consciousness is openness instead of contraction — a growth mindset instead of a fixed mindset.
Rather than reacting to psychological insecurity, seemingly small conflicts can create an openness to learning where communication was blocked and how we can improve our entire organization’s workflow.
In sum…
Sample of an Integrity Session:
- Friendly greeting (people often arrive with tension, so it’s your job to break it, i.e. ask “how are you all?” Make a joke about the tension, etc.)
- Ask to the group: “Where are WE (meaning each person present) out of integrity with …. / when it comes to ….?
- First person who offers an answer says Ex. “I’m out of integrity with…” Ask the person to translate this into the ACKNOWLEDGE of the AIR method: “I committed to ___, but I did ___.” Listen carefully and use your intuition — either the person will nail the in-depth misalignment and you can jump to Step 5 OR you will need to probe deeper with “Is that really what you’re committed to?” OR “What else are you committed to?”
- If you’re satisfied with the Acknowledgment, then ask for the I of the AIR method: “What was IMPACT of that/your lack of integrity?” The person will likely start with surface impacts, so you can continually probe, “And what was the impact of that?”
- When you’re satisfied that that person has reached their blindspot of impact, turn to the group, and ask, “Did anyone else feel any other impacts from [person’s] lack of integrity with this?”
- When you’re satisfied that everyone feels the 360 degree impact of the lack of integrity , state: “Before we jump to finding solutions and re-committing, let’s keep going with where else we’re integrity.”
- Ask, “Who else wants to share where they’re out of integrity?” Jump back to Step 3.
- When everyone has gone through the A and I thoroughly, there should be clear solutions forming. Now you can ask the group or individuals for the R of the AIR method: “How can you RESTORE integrity moving forward? Ideas? Thoughts?” If needed, you can guide people to use the terminology “Moving forward, I will…”
- After is clear on how they’re moving forward and it’s time to end the session, ask everyone to commit again to what they stand for. Use the following terms: “I commit to…”
- Thank everyone for their vulnerability and willingness to improve the team and workflow. Ask for feedback and listen without taking it personally.
Note: Put the above into your own words. It’s meant to feel organic and relaxed — like a fun exploration, not a formal and mechanic confrontation.
Please let me know if you try this with your team. What worked for you? What didn’t work? Any feedback or comments? Can’t wait to hear from you!
