This work is a compilation of my experiences as an HR Specialist in Workplace Relations, including notes, learnings, and antidotes from the journeys of people with whom I have crossed paths throughout my career.
Written by Alvi Mackole
In the not-too-distant past, our gorgeous blue planet was thrown into a pandemic, and we arrived on the other side where technology has taken over, spearheading our personal, social and professional interactions.
While most have embraced these changes to different degrees, a few still struggle. To these few, the world may look the same, but they have strong reactions in areas that no longer work the way it used to, resulting in conflict. This is what could happen in a Workplace during change.
The below article is aimed at providing HR professionals insight into conflict during a change management process.
Difference between Agility and Instability
Businesses or Organisations today understand the need to remain agile by constantly evolving. But does this equate to being unstable?
From experience, my understanding of an agile approach to change requires not just a clear vision, it should empower experts deep within the proposed area of change inside the organisation to weigh in on the proposals. Making use of Project and change management experts, embracing a “test run and learn from it” approach provided better leverage and buy-in. Strategically staggering multiple changes in its implementation, coaching, building capabilities, check-in with the areas not only during the change process but post-change, frequent feedback etc went a long way in successfully implementing and sustaining a change.
I have heard of stories and watched many change managements that missed out on developing deep roots and support systems to quickly solve challenges as they appeared. This resulted in loss of employee trust. It affected current performance creating frustration. It also gave rise to unacceptable workplace behaviour, resulting in conflict and crisis management. Any further changes were met with reluctance, resistance and hostility.
Team Managers and Change
An evolving and change savvy organisation knows change to be an expensive and time-consuming process. While change is vital for an organization to prosper, change is never easy or simple. I have not come across a change that did not have any push backs. In fact, I’d say it is healthy to have a small level of conflict as it aids the exploration of aspects that may have been missed at the scoping or explorative stage. In Australia, the Fair Work Act requires that a consultation process be followed and sets the criteria for significant change, requiring unions to be notified of these proposed changes before consultation begins.
A business that does not make use of project, change and conflict resolution specialists expects their managers not only to be proficient in the area of business but also be skilled in project and change management, in addition to being competent in conflict management.
Take for example “Shane” who has managed to preserve his role and responsibilities over the years as the business transformed through multiple restructures. A new proposed change is expecting that he do his job differently. To the organisation, it may appear that Shane is being stubborn and difficult. From a change perspective, the proposed change should not just include training and/or redeployment, it should also consider the cultural aspect of a mind-set change. A poorly managed change impacts the manager and the team causing Psychosocial hazards. Depending on the size of change, a flow on effect to other areas of the business may occur.
Change – Positive and Negative
A change that is implemented positively focuses mainly on “how to” rather than the “what” of change. This results in teams who welcome opportunities for themselves and their organization to develop and grow.
A well planned major change can fail because of mediocre implementation or an inability to sustain their initial fantastic results.
The resulting outcome from what I have seen, heard and understood can cause havoc in different ways. In the short term, effects may be seen in productivity, project delays, budget overruns, customer dissatisfaction, etc – followed by possible long term effects like reputational loss for the business, ongoing conflicts within and between teams, customers bearing the brunt of a change that should have been invisible to them, etc.
Disruption costs in Change Management
Change is always happening as life and businesses evolve around us. Even with all the scoping, understanding of costs associated with change and obtaining the most accurate figures, there is always some level of risk. While we may be able to identify and mitigate some of the potential risks, there are other risks that we may be unable to cost.
One of them is conflict.
I had a colleague who described to me their frustration due to the multiple delays including conflicts that remained unresolved at the local level resulting in applications being lodged at various times with the Fair Work Commission. Not only did this incur
additional costs, it contributed to the stress and vast delays in implementation. By the end of it, everyone involved in the change were frustrated and exhausted.
What are your thoughts on what could have been the inflection point to prevent the process from going so wrong?
How do we manage conflict during change?
Some level of conflict is healthy. It is when these conflicts remain unresolved, they begin to negatively affect the culture of the organisation. What starts as a minor concern may quickly escalate to tensions and if still unresolved, to a crisis.
It is common for work related issues to turn into personal attacks if a way to convert the conflict into understanding and an agreed path forward is not found.
Approaching conflict resolution requires understanding of the difference between the underlying and manifest parts of the conflict. Many conflict resolution specialists will agree that unless the former is addressed, any outcomes will probably not be as effective, especially in the longer term.
A trained mediator understands that a reconciliation needs to occur between needs and interests, whilst assessing the type and level of conflict. They do this in a variety of ways with the intent of taking into account each of the parties’ rights and power, addressing underlying problems, identifying issues and developing mutually acceptable and sustainable solutions. This in turn increases satisfaction, enhances relationships and reduces the possibility of recurrence of that conflict. Although it may appear time consuming and laborious in the short term, it pays for itself by minimizing costs associated with delay and substantially decreasing the level of psychosocial risks.
Key Takeaway Questions
When budgeting for a major change, do you have a line item for conflict management?
Do you have connections with professional mediators who understand your industry?
Do you have sufficient understanding of mediation and group facilitation processes to know when to call in a mediator?
Looking for a workplace mediator find one here: Find a Mediator
