Ron Kraybill

Embrace what is

Style Matters helps trainers build conflict resolution skills in settings where managing differences is difficult. Style Matters is especially effective where diversity and stress are key factors.

Engage where they are

Many groups and teams are now scattered geographically while working together online. In settings where single format learning tools are obsolete, optimize reflection and learning across multiple platforms, in workshops, online, or both.

Work with limited resources

High training costs discourage committing to learning that could bring high yields. Reduce prep, coordination, and delivery time with trainer-friendly online tools. With clear, detailed support materials, create rich learning, on-location or on-line, in less time, with less travel, even if you're new to training. Reduce costs even more with sensible pricing.

More conflict styles training, less prep time. 

You want your group or team to manage conflict well.
And you don't have days to put into workshop design.

Why reinvent the wheel? The newly revised Trainers Guide to Conflict Styles Workshops saves precious prep time with full outline of workshops in several formats. Trainer inputs, exercises, discussion questions, and more.  Deliver a workshop your participants will love!   

• Step by step outline of workshop content
• Suggested trainer inputs for each step
• Exercises and discussion questions
• How to interpret scores
• Guidance for training culturally diverse groups
• Works for both Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument and Ron Kraybill's Style Matters inventory
• NEW! Remote training and conflict styles learning at a distance.

DOWNLOAD FREE NOW

40 page step-by-step guide to leading a conflict styles workshop, from start to finish. It's FREE!

Polarity Management

Beneath the immediate issues in many conflicts lies a polarity that ought to be managed rather than a problem to be resolved.  Should the organization produce more widgets or better widgets?  When people stop and look at both sides of the argument, they sometimes realize that achieving both is important.  

Long term vs. short-term?  Gentle on the workers vs. greater productivity?  More vs. better?   Tradition vs. creativity?  Letting go of either side of these polarities may damage the organization.   Both sides in such an argument need the energies and skills of the other side.  Polarity management is a dialogue tool to help a group walk, literally, through the benefits and costs of both sides of a polarity.

A polarity is probably present when: an issue is ongoing or incapable of being “finished” with a decision, and when there is interdependency between the two main views on the issue.   Often there are important values underlying each view.

Procedure

1.  Define the values or commitments underlying the conflict.   With each major view, ask and listen for: what deep concern or commitment motivates people holding this view?  For example, behind a staff member’s resistance to a director’s push for written proposals regarding future work lies a commitment to autonomy.  Behind the director’s insistence on detailed proposals lies a commitment to teamwork.  

Sometimes several polarities lie behind one conflict: tradition vs. innovation; law vs. grace, freedom vs. accountability, stability vs. change, spontaneity vs. predictability, intuition vs. reasoning, etc.  In this case, list several, then choose for work with the group the one or two that seem to carry the most tension.  Be sure to give a neutral name to each side of the polarity, so adherents feel respected.

If the time available for a polarity discussion with the whole group is very short, choose the polarity you will discuss and its wording in advance, but be sure to test out your choice with several people on all sides.   If there is enough total group time available, ie: an hour or more, you could use open group discussion or a tool like the Samoan Circle and lead the group in choosing the polarity/ies to discuss.

2.  Mark the room into four large squares, using masking tape on the floor, or a few strategically placed chairs.  Explain that you are going to together walk through an exploration of the costs and benefits of exclusive emphasis on each value.   See the diagram below.

3.  Invite the whole group to join you in standing in Quadrant A +.   Ask people to call out the benefits of an exclusive emphasis on Value A.  After numerous benefits have been named say, “Let’s imagine that in real life our group gave exclusive attention to this value for some time.  After a while some people begin to get frustrated.  They become aware that there are costs to only focusing on this value.  The numbers of the dissatisfied grow quite large.  So let’s go to Quadrant A – and consider what those costs are.”   Proceed with the whole group to Quadrant A- and invite people to call out the costs.

4.  After numerous costs have been mentioned say, “The costs of exclusive attention to Value A become so clear that people begin calling for a change.  ‘We should change our emphasis to Value B,’ they say.  Over time, Value B looks ever more attractive as the costs of an exclusive focus on A become more apparent.  So let’s go to Quadrant B + and consider the benefits.”   Lead the group to Quadrant B + and have people call out the benefits of devoting all resources to Value B.

5.   Then say, “Value B seems attractive for some time, but after a while, some people begin to see there are problems with attending only to this value.   Let’s go and hear what they are saying.”  Proceed with the group to Quadrant B- and invite the group to call out the costs of devoting all resources to Value B.

6.  Say, “After some time of this, a lot of people are very aware of the costs of an exclusive emphasis on Value B.  They want a change, and Value A looks really attractive.   So let’s go back to the benefits of Value A.”   Return to Quadrant A +.    Enjoy the laughter with the group!  Then say, “We have just completed the life cycle of a group that tries to decide for one side of a polarity that really ought not to be decided for one side, but rather dealt with as an ongoing polarity.  Groups that do this typically move in a long, slow, continuous figure eight from one side of the polarity to another.   Let’s return to our seats now and talk about the alternatives.”

7.  Reflect on the experience as a whole group.  If time allows begin with small group discussion, then move to open group discussion or a Samoan Circle.  Useful questions: a) What insights do we gain on our situation?   b) How would it affect our group life and our feelings about each other if we chose to respond to our difficulties as a polarity to manage rather than a problem to solve?   How would we benefit?  What challenges would we face?  c) What specific things would we have to do and say to each other in order to manage this polarity well?  d) Are there wounds from the past when we were viewing this as a problem to be solved that need to be addressed in order to enable us to work together well in managing this paradox?

Strengths.  Polarity Management gets people moving around physically in reflecting on deeply held views.  Purposeful physical movement always assists dialogue.  It enables people to stand together as a group in examining each perspective.  It gives a simple and clear structure for examining complex issues.   People come out of the exercise thoughtful and reflective.

Cautions.  Polarity Management is a tool for recognizing complexity.  It will not decide the issue for you or give you answers.  Also, not every conflict arises from a polarity.  Be sure to do some kind of follow-up reflection along the lines described in step seven.  If things are tense it is not enough simply to say, “we agree we have a polarity to manage” and then go on.   Discuss in specific terms what you need from each other to sustain good relationships across time.     

------------------

Notes: The concept comes from Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable Problems, by Barry Johnson. HRD Press: Amherst, MA, 1996.  A websearch on “polarity management” will bring you to many additional resources.  See for example, this essay written for health care planners.  Some facilitators prefer the word “dilemma” rather than “polarity”.   

The instructions above use the language of “underlying values” but it is not necessary to put things in terms of values.  A facilitator might instead speak of “major concerns”, “deep commitments”, etc.

By Ron Kraybill
www.RiverhouseePress.com

Copyright 2007