Survey report October Leadership and the management of conflict at work

Transcription

1 Survey report October 2008 Leadership and the management of conflict at work

2 Contents Summary of key findings 2 The impact of conflict at work 4 The causes of conflict at work 8 Managing and preventing conflict 10 The benefits of investing in managing conflict at work 16 Conclusions 18 Background to the survey 21 Leadership and the management of conflict at work 1

3 Summary of key findings This report sets out the findings of a survey by the CIPD, in association with business psychology consultancy OPP, into leadership and conflict management in the workplace. The analysis is based on replies from 660 HR practitioners in organisations employing nearly 2.3 million employees. The impact of conflict at work Almost half (44%) of respondents report that they have to manage disputes at work frequently or continually. The survey finds that on average HR professionals spend 3.4 hours every week managing conflict at work. This rises to 3.8 hours for public sector respondents. Six in ten respondents say that they had to manage conflict at work in the previous seven days, with more than half of these saying that the dispute in question remained ongoing. Nearly two-thirds of respondents report that conflict at work that escalated has resulted in the absence from work of one or more of the parties involved. Half of respondents say that conflict has resulted in people leaving the organisation and a similar proportion report that disputes that escalated resulted in bullying or harassment. Nearly one in three (28%) respondents admit to having left a job as a result of conflict at work, illustrating clearly one of the most negative aspects of conflict at work in terms of business impact. The causes of conflict at work The most commonly cited cause of conflict as far as HR practitioners are concerned is warring egos and personality clashes, mentioned by 44% of respondents as being the number one source of interpersonal strain. This is followed by poor leadership from the top (30%), inadequate line management (21%) and weak performance management (17%). Heavy workload and bullying and/or harassment are also identified as significant causes of disputes in the workplace. Managing and preventing conflict More than eight in ten HR professionals cite identifying and addressing underlying tensions more effectively before things start going wrong as key to helping managers become more effective in managing conflict at work. Two-thirds (66%) of respondents identify the need for managers to have more interaction with their reports, provide more clarity about what s expected and model the right behaviours. Improved consultation in day-to-day management activities is also regarded highly as a means of helping line managers prevent and manage disputes in the workplace. More than 60% of HR practitioners report they have been trained in conflict management as part of their professional development, while 38% state that they have received training in the context of leadership development. When asked what training their organisations had provided for line managers in conflict management, 40% of respondents say that it is offered as part of leadership development. Just under a third of HR practitioners report that training in conflict management skills for line managers is provided through coaching from their manager. More than a quarter (27%) say that line managers receive no training of any description in conflict management. 2 Leadership and the management of conflict at work

4 The benefits of investing in managing conflict at work Almost a third of respondents report that training in conflict management has led to a reduction in the number of disciplinary and grievance cases, 28% think there has been an improvement in employee morale and 25% believe there has been an increase in team performance and productivity. In all, 13% of HR practitioners say conflict management training has helped reduce employee absence levels, 12% have seen a reduction in employment tribunal claims and 10% report a reduction in employee turnover. One in three (34%) HR practitioners believe that better teamwork would be the single biggest potential gain in their organisation as a result of more effective management of conflict, followed by higher employee engagement at 30% and improved productivity and greater internal efficiency at 12%. Leadership and the management of conflict at work 3

5 The impact of conflict at work Nearly half of HR practitioners say they have to manage conflict in the workplace continually or frequently, with sickness absence, staff turnover and bullying being the most likely result where disputes escalate. In response to the significant and growing challenge conflict at work creates for organisations, the CIPD joined forces with international business psychology consultancy OPP to conduct research into the role of leadership in managing disputes in the workplace. This is based on a survey of 660 HR practitioners exploring the perceived causes and evident costs of conflict in the workplace, along with the measures organisations are currently implementing to prevent and manage workplace tensions. The survey finds that managing conflict is an integral part of most HR practitioners jobs on a daily basis. Almost half (44%) of respondents report that they have to manage disputes at work frequently or continually. This rises to 51% among public sector respondents. As many as one in five respondents claim to manage conflict continually in organisations of between 5,000 and 10,000 employees. See Table 1. Conflict at work is also extremely time-consuming. The survey finds that on average HR professionals spend 3.4 hours every week managing conflict at work. This rises to 3.8 hours for public sector respondents. Just under half (48%) of respondents spend up to half a day a week and a further 12% spend the equivalent of an entire day a week handling conflict. HR professionals in mid-sized organisations (with between 500 and 1,001 employees) appear to fare the worst, being more than twice as likely as smaller firms Table 1: The extent to which HR practitioners have to deal with conflict in the workplace (% of respondents) Manufacturing By sector and Private Non-profit Public Average production sector services organisations sector Yes, continually Yes, frequently Yes, occasionally No, never By size of organisation 250 1,001 5,001 10,001 or fewer ,000 5,000 10,000 or more Yes, continually Yes, frequently Yes, occasionally No, never Leadership and the management of conflict at work

6 to spend a day a week or more managing conflict at work. See Table 2. Six in ten respondents say that they had to manage conflict at work in the previous seven days, with more than half of these saying that the dispute in question remained ongoing. and interpersonal relationships or productivity had suffered. In all, 15% of respondents report that external legal advice had been sought. See Table 3 on page 6. Worryingly, as many as one in ten (10%) HR practitioners who indicate that the recent conflict has now been resolved say that it took them more than a Table 2: How much time per week HR practitioners spend managing conflict at work (% of respondents) By sector Manufacturing Private and sector Non-profit Public Average production services organisations sector None Less than 1 hour a week hours a week hours a week hours a week Over 15 hours a week Mean score (hours) By size of organisation ,001 5,001 10,001 or fewer ,000 5,000 10,000 or more None 2 1 Less than 1 hour a week hours a week hours a week hours a week 0 4 Over 15 hours a week 0 0 Mean score (hours) Respondents in organisations employing between 251 and 500 people are most likely to report that they have experienced conflict at work in the previous seven days (67%), while HR practitioners in businesses employing between 501 and 1,000 employees are most likely to say that such disputes are still ongoing. Public sector HR professionals are also more likely to experience conflict that drags on (41% versus 31% in the private services sector). Just over 40% of HR practitioners that were involved in trying to resolve an ongoing dispute say that the conflict was still being dealt with on an informal basis. Nearly half say the dispute had led to disruption in the team week; this doubles (to 19%) in the largest organisations (those with more than 10,000 employees) and appears to be more likely in the public sector, where one in six (15%) report this. Of course, the cost implications of this are not limited to HR time; the missed opportunity for HR teams to be doing something more constructive also has its price. The impact of conflict on management time is also very considerable. Nearly a fifth of respondents estimate that where recent conflict at work has been resolved it took up to a day in management time, while 6% of respondents report that the recently resolved conflict took in total more than ten days of management time. Leadership and the management of conflict at work 5

7 Table 3: The impact of conflict at work where it has not been resolved (% of respondents) Manufacturing Private By sector and sector Non-profit Public Average production services organisations sector It is still being dealt with on an informal basis. 44 There is disruption in the team and interpersonal relationships/productivity 46 are suffering. It has moved from informal grievance to a formal grievance being lodged. 29 It has resulted in the use of the disciplinary procedure. 15 It has resulted in an employee being suspended. 5 An employee has been dismissed. 3 External legal advice has been sought Non-profit organisations and public sector employers spend more in management time resolving conflict at work than their private sector counterparts. See Table 4. In situations where conflict is not managed effectively and escalates, the fallout for the business can be extremely damaging. Nearly two-thirds of respondents report that conflict at work that escalated has resulted in the absence from work of one or more of the parties involved. Half of respondents say that conflict has resulted in people leaving the organisation and a similar proportion report that disputes that escalated resulted in bullying or harassment. More than four in ten respondents say that conflict has led to one or more individuals involved leaving the organisation. See Table 5. Nearly one in ten respondents report that conflict at work that escalated resulted in physical violence. Public sector organisations are most likely to report that disputes at work resulted in sickness absence and bullying or harassment. Public sector employers are also much less likely to dismiss people (29%) as a result of conflict at work, compared with the survey average (44%). Where is conflict most prominent? Conflict is not confined to one area of the business, nor to one functional team; this research shows conflict occurring at all levels of the organisation and across all departments. However, there are identifiable hot spots, according to HR professionals. They observe that conflict surfaces most frequently between line managers and their direct reports, with 47% of respondents identifying Table 4: The amount of management time spent resolving conflict at work (% of respondents) Manufacturing Private Public Average and production sector services Non-profit sector Less than 1 hour hours Up to a day days days More than 10 days Leadership and the management of conflict at work

8 Table 5: The result of conflict at work in circumstances where it has escalated (% of respondents) Bullying/harassment 50 Personal insults/verbal attacks 42 An individual/people left the organisation An individual/people were dismissed Manufacturing Private and sector Non-profit Public Average production services organisations sector Cross-departmental conflict 28 Employees being moved to different departments 38 Project failure 7 Sickness/absence of one or more parties 63 Physical violence 8 I have never been involved in a conflict that escalated these relationships as most likely to lead to conflict within organisations. The next most common areas of conflict are between front-line roles (14%), between different levels of management (14%) and between members of the senior executive team (13%). One in five (19%) respondents report that their organisation s senior management team is in frequent or constant conflict, rising to almost one in four (24%) in the voluntary sector. Six in ten HR practitioners say such conflict is occasional, with just 10% reporting completely harmonious relationships at the most senior level. When asked if they personally currently work with someone with whom they have experienced conflict, HR respondents replies were consistent. All have been in conflict with someone in their organisation with most occurrences being with a colleague, cited by more than one in four (27%). Almost one in five (18%) say they have been in conflict with senior management, suggesting that HR practitioners are not shy of taking issue with their organisation s leaders, while 13% of respondents report conflict with their own immediate manager. Just one in ten (11%) cite conflict with direct reports. Almost one in six respondents (14%) report conflict between entry-level/front-line roles, and between different levels of management. In terms of its prevalence in functional teams, HR professionals cite operations as generating most conflict (48%), followed by disputes between teams (38%). Tensions are also commonly observed in sales and customer service, with 12% of HR respondents citing each of these as conflict-rich departments. The functional teams in which HR practitioners note the least conflict are perhaps unsurprisingly HR, cited as most peaceful by more than half (58%), with finance (31%) and IT (25%) following in second and third places respectively. Interestingly, HR professionals in organisations of more than 10,000 employees are twice as likely to have experienced conflict with their managers, a direct report or with customers than those in organisations of fewer than 250 people. It s clear that workplace conflict is inescapable, and in HR teams particularly in larger organisations there are some difficult relationships to be negotiated. Nearly one in three (28%) respondents admit to having left a job as a result of conflict at work, illustrating clearly one of the most negative aspects of conflict at work in terms of business impact. Leadership and the management of conflict at work 7

9 The causes of conflict at work The top three causes of conflict in the workplace are warring egos and personality clashes, poor leadership from the top of the organisation and inadequate line management. The most commonly cited cause of conflict as far as HR practitioners are concerned is warring egos and personality clashes, mentioned by 44% of respondents as being the number one source of interpersonal strain. Poor leadership from the top is not far behind at 30%, which is substantially more frequently cited in large organisations than small (32% versus 23%). See Table 6. Poor line management and weak performance management are next on the list of conflict drivers, cited by 29% and 21% of respondents respectively. Curiously, HR practitioners in mid-sized organisations (that is, 500 1,000 employees) are more than twice as likely to cite this as a cause of conflict, with 40% mentioning it versus 17% and 14% in smaller and larger organisations respectively. A smaller percentage (14%) blame heavy workloads and inadequate resources as key reasons for the conflict they encounter at work. There are some further interesting differences between the rank order reported by HR professionals in different industry sectors and in different sizes of organisation. A lack of openness and honesty, for example in promotions and appointments, is ranked number one by 23% of HR respondents in organisations with more than 10,000 employees, as compared with 3% in companies with between 250 and 500 people. A clash of values is cited as a major cause by 26% of those working in the voluntary sector, versus only 4% in the private sector. These differences are particularly pronounced in HR professionals responses to the issue of bullying and harassment. In companies of between 250 and 500 employees, almost one in four (23%) cite it as a major cause of conflict, whereas it is raised by only 3% of those in organisations of between 5,000 and 10,000 people. HR respondents in the voluntary sector are more likely than those in the private sector to list it as a major cause (16% versus 9%). Likewise, those in the voluntary sector are much more likely to report taboo topics that can t be brought to the surface as a cause of conflict than any other type of organisation. It seems that HR practitioners in the voluntary sector have to be particularly adept at managing underlying interpersonal tensions in the workplace if they are to manage conflict effectively. With workplace conflict evidently an unavoidable part of working life, HR professionals clearly need to be confident in their own conflict management skills, but more importantly take action to ensure that managers have the skills and awareness to step in and intervene at an early stage as soon as the first signs of conflict emerge. The new regulatory framework for dispute resolution coming into force in the UK in 2009 will provide greater encouragement and opportunities for managers to resolve disputes informally before the formal disciplinary or grievance procedures come into play. The question is whether managers are willing to and capable of taking this on effectively, and how HR can best support them in doing so. 8 Leadership and the management of conflict at work

10 Table 6: The main causes of conflict at work Respondents (%) rating as a most important source of conflict at work By sector Average Manufacturing and production Private sector services Non-profit organisations Public sector Personality clashes and warring egos Poor leadership from the top of the organisation Poor line management Poor performance management Heavy workload/ inadequate resources Bullying/harassment Lack of openness and honesty, for example in appointments and promotions Lack of clarity about accountability/ ownership Lack of role clarity Clash of values Stress Taboo topics that can t be brought to the surface Perceived discrimination Poor selection of/pairing of teams By size of organisation 250 or fewer ,000 1,001 5,000 5,001 10,000 10,001 or more Personality clashes and warring egos Poor leadership from the top of the organisation Poor line management Poor performance management Heavy workload/ inadequate resources Bullying/harassment Lack of openness and honesty, for example in appointments and promotions Lack of clarity about accountability/ ownership Lack of role clarity Clash of values Stress Taboo topics that can t be brought to the surface Perceived discrimination Poor selection of/pairing of teams Leadership and the management of conflict at work 9

11 Managing and preventing conflict Managers should spend more time addressing underlying tensions at work and having informal one-to-one conversations with the people they manage, as well as providing greater clarity over what is expected of employees, if they are to manage conflict more effectively. Separate research conducted by OPP in association with the CIPD into employee attitudes to conflict at work finds that the vast majority of employees surveyed have to deal with conflict at work, and as many as three in ten do so constantly or frequently. Given that the negative consequences of workplace conflict reported by employees in the research report, Fight, Flight or Face It: Celebrating the effective management of conflict at work, range from bad feeling and avoiding contact with colleagues to sickness absence and reduced productivity, the argument for taking decisive action is strong. But where do we start? It will not be news to most HR practitioners that, for best results, organisations need to lead change from the top team. It s a familiar story, too, to hear that people will only behave differently if they are given the skills to do so and shown the possibility of different, more positive outcomes. Prevention beats cure Respondents were asked what would help managers be more effective in dealing with conflict. More than eight in ten HR professionals cite identifying and addressing underlying tensions more effectively before things start going wrong. Two-thirds (66%) also mention the need for managers to have more interaction with their reports, provide more clarity about what s expected and model the right behaviours. Improved consultation in day-to-day management activities is also regarded highly as a means of preventing and managing disputes in the workplace. See Table Leadership and the management of conflict at work

12 Table 7: What managers should do to improve how they manage conflict at work (% of respondents) Identify and address underlying tensions more effectively More informal one-toones with the people they manage Improved consultation in day-to-day management of activities Provide more clarity about what is expected Provide more clarity over areas of responsibility Be a model of the right behaviours Provide counselling for employees under stress Act as mediators when conflict develops Raise the subject of possible conflict as part of business (rather than shying away from it or punishing it) Not let their own egos get in the way of relationships with colleagues Manage toxic individuals who create conflict at work more directly and firmly Provide improved work life balance Nothing, conflict is an inevitable part of working life Average Manufacturing and production Private sector services Non-profit organisations Public sector The employee perspective on conflict at work HR practitioners understand that nipping problems in the bud is crucial if conflict is to be managed properly because of the difficulties of dealing with disputes that escalate to the point where the formal disciplinary or grievance procedure has to be used. However, according to the joint OPP/CIPD research report into employee attitudes and conflict, Fight, Flight or Face It: Celebrating the effective management of conflict at work, one in six employees (16%) reports that a recent workplace conflict was not quickly resolved or became more intense, which suggests that many disputes are not being resolved at an early stage. In the new scheme of things, the balance between preventing escalation and genuinely resolving issues will need to be carefully managed. Leadership and the management of conflict at work 11

13 Training the trainer? More than 60% of HR practitioners report they have been trained in conflict management as part of their professional development, while 38% state that they have received training in the context of leadership development. One in three respondents have received conflict resolution training through coaching from their line manager and 23% have been on a formal training course delivered by an external trainer. About a third of (31%) HR practitioners use the Internet for information on conflict management, and 15% take advice from family and friends on how to handle conflict situations. This suggests that many are being left to their own devices to develop important skills, and there is evidence that this is particularly the case in smaller organisations where formal training may be seen as discretionary. Just 8% have received no training of any description in managing disputes in the workplace. Organisations with 250 employees or fewer are least likely to have received any formal external training in conflict management or mediation, and most likely to seek advice outside work or from the Internet, compared with larger organisations. Perhaps less predictably, only 53% of HR professionals in organisations with more than 5,000 employees claim to have been trained as part of their professional development, as against 63% overall. According to the OPP/CIPD research report into employee attitudes and conflict, Fight, Flight or Face It: Celebrating the effective management of conflict at work, training helps employees manage conflict more effectively by breeding confidence and comfort in handling conflict professionally, but under half (44%) have actually received any. Practising what you preach When asked how the training in conflict management helped their own effectiveness, 65% state that they achieve more positive outcomes for both parties as a result, and 56% say that it helps them understand the other person s (or persons ) perspective in a dispute. Slightly under half (46%) of HR practitioners surveyed say that it helps them support higher performance in their role. This raises the question of whether the training provided is sufficiently focused on the business impact of managing conflict effectively, rather than simply on improving interpersonal skills. Almost 85% of respondents rate themselves as managing conflict adequately or better. Private sector HR professionals are twice as likely to rate themselves as handling conflict very well compared with those in the public sector, although both numbers are low (10% versus 4%). Eight in ten respondents believe that conflict-handling is either very or critically important as a management skill. Those working in organisations with more than 5,000 employees are substantially more likely to see it as critically important than those with fewer than 500 (49% versus 21%). When asked what training their organisations had provided for line managers in conflict management, 40% of respondents say that it is offered as part of leadership development. Just under a third of HR practitioners report that training in conflict management skills for line managers is provided through coaching from their manager. In all, 16% of respondents say training for line managers is provided by a formal course delivered by someone within the organisation and a similar proportion say that training is provided through a formal course delivered by an external trainer. More than a quarter (27%) say that none is given, rising to 39% in smaller companies. See Table Leadership and the management of conflict at work

14 Table 8: Training provided to line managers in managing conflict (% of respondents) Formal course in conflict management, provided by a member of your organisation Manufacturing Private and sector Non-profit Public Average production services organisations sector Formal course in conflict management from an external trainer Coaching from their line manager Informal peer-to-peer coaching As part of leadership development training Sponsoring relevant training outside work Mediation skills training Relationship management training Advice from Internet on managing conflict at work None Managers in the public sector are most likely to have experienced training as part of leadership development, according to HR professionals (51% versus 37% in the private services sector) and substantially more likely than others to have benefited from a formal course run internally (25% versus 15% in the private services sector) or mediation skills training (23% versus just 3% respectively). This indicates that HR in the public sector takes conflict management very seriously as a competence. However the survey shows that public sector organisations are most likely to deal with conflict continually or frequently and spend more management time on managing conflict. This raises the question of whether public sector managers focus too much attention on managing the effects of conflict rather than preventing conflict through effective people management and early intervention for positive outcomes. The survey finds that senior leaders are less likely than line managers to be trained in effective dispute resolution, with a third (33%) of respondents admitting that none is provided. Just 38% of HR practitioners say senior leaders receive training in conflict management as part of leadership development programmes. About a fifth of respondents report that leaders receive conflict management training through coaching from an external professional coach and a similar proportion say their senior leaders receive such training by informal peer-to-peer coaching. In about one in six organisations training for senior managers in this area is provided through a formal course delivered by an external trainer. Public sector organisations are most likely to provide conflict management training for senior managers as part of leadership development programmes (46%) compared with the other main sectors. Larger organisations those employing 5,000 people or more are twice as likely to provide conflict management training in this way (52% versus 26% in smaller companies). Leadership and the management of conflict at work 13

15 Line management competence and effective conflict management The CIPD has produced a competency framework that sets out the positive behaviours managers need to exhibit to prevent and manage conflict in the workplace (see page 22). The framework is set out in the CIPD publication Managing Conflict at Work: A guide for line managers (2008). The framework is based on joint research conducted by the CIPD and the Health and Safety Executive exploring the links between line management behaviour and stress at work. The research involved interviews with nearly 400 line managers and employees, as well as focus group discussions with more than 60 HR practitioners. As part of this work the specific management competencies required to manage conflict at work were identified. These include dealing with conflict issues as they arise, having a participative management approach, monitoring team relationships, acting as a role model and with integrity, as well as using the official disciplinary process appropriately. How managers are rated on managing conflict at work When asked whether they are satisfied with managers effectiveness in managing workplace conflict, however, three-quarters (75%) of HR practitioners report that they are not. More than half (59%) rate managers as being below adequate in handling conflict generally. This dissatisfaction is most pronounced in the public sector, with 64% rating their line managers as less than adequate in this critical area. Those working in HR in companies of more than 10,000 employees are significantly more likely than others to rate their managers more highly, with 19% stating that they are better than average or very effective (versus just 11% in companies with 250 people or fewer). HR practitioners are clear about what their organisations need to be doing differently to manage conflict more effectively. Half of all HR respondents state that managers must develop the right skills. A further 12% state the importance of conflict management training across the workforce and 10% cite the value of providing training across the organisation in the appropriate values, including dignity at work. It should be encouraging for HR professionals to learn that 62% of employees believe that it is everyone s responsibility to ensure that workplace conflict is managed effectively, and only 15% suggest that this sits with HR. Only 9% of HR respondents believe this to be true, but a larger number lay the responsibility at the door of managers and senior leaders. More than 80% of respondents regard conflict management as either very important or critically important as a management and leadership skill. Respondents were asked what would make the most impact on creating environments where all employees are treated with dignity and respect in the workplace. Nearly half of HR practitioners cite the establishment of clear organisational values based on dignity and respect at work as being the most critical intervention. This was followed by the example set by the board (17%), training for line managers in people management skills (15%) and training for all employees in dignity and respect at work. Just 7% of respondents identify the attitude and personality of the chief executive as being of central importance to creating positive work cultures that promote and support dignity and respect at work. 14 Leadership and the management of conflict at work

16 Conflict management and the changing regulatory framework There is no doubt that conflict at work is an increasing challenge for employers. In the number of individual employment disputes that resulted in employment tribunal cases increased to 132,577, compared with 115,039 for the previous year. The increasing number of claims can be partly explained by the public s increased awareness of employment rights and easier access to litigation. No win, no fee lawyers provide an avenue for disgruntled employees to lodge claims against their employer at no cost or risk to themselves. In addition, the introduction of new employment legislation in the last few years has added to the challenges faced by employers. Since 2003 new regulation has come into force that prohibits discrimination on the basis of age, sexual orientation and religion and belief, adding to existing laws outlawing discrimination against people for reason of their race, sex or disability. The CIPD has welcomed the evolving legal framework as a means of promoting fair treatment and equality of opportunity at work. Organisations that embrace this agenda gain evident business benefit in terms of their employer brand and ability to attract and retain talent. However, changing engrained prejudices and behaviours is not easy and increases the likelihood of disputes as employees gradually adapt and develop a better understanding of their new rights and responsibilities in the workplace. The challenges associated with managing conflict at work were further exacerbated by the introduction in October 2004 of the Statutory Dispute Resolution Regulations, which introduced minimum standard threestep disciplinary and grievance procedures. The principle behind their introduction was sound: to ensure that employers and employees make every effort to resolve disputes in the workplace. In practice, however, the statutory procedures have led to undue formalisation of how conflict at work is managed. In the CIPD 2007 survey report Managing Conflict at Work, employers said that the regulations have generated more formal disciplinary and grievance cases without reducing the number of employment tribunal applications made by discontented employees. Employers also said they were more likely to rely on external legal advice to resolve disputes since the introduction of the Regulations. In 2006 Michael Gibbons led a government-sponsored review of the Regulations and dispute resolution in the UK more broadly. He recommended that the statutory procedures be repealed and a new dispute resolution framework be set up with greater emphasis on informal, early dispute resolution and greater use of alternative dispute resolution approaches such as mediation. The new Employment Bill will scrap the statutory dispute resolution procedures, paving the way for measures designed to encourage earlier and less formal resolution of conflict at work. The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform is still finalising the replacement package of measures, which are likely to be introduced in April The new regulatory framework will include a revised Acas code of practice on discipline and grievance, and a revamped Acas helpline, which will offer prospective claimants clear, up-front advice on what bringing a claim involves and what their options are. The revised framework will offer greater flexibility in workplace dispute resolution and provide greater encouragement and opportunity for managers to resolve disputes informally before any formal disciplinary or grievance procedures come into play. However if this is to happen, organisations must develop their leaders across the business to ensure they are exhibiting the right behaviours to manage and prevent conflict. Organisations must also put in place clear policies and procedures underpinned by appropriate training for managers and employees, outlining organisational values and the rights and responsibilities of individuals. Leadership and the management of conflict at work 15

17 The benefits of investing in managing conflict at work Improved team morale and productivity, as well as improved working relationships, are identified by respondents as the key benefits from effective conflict management. Respondents cite a range of benefits that training in performance and productivity. In all, 13% of conflict management has delivered for the business. respondents say conflict management training has Almost a third report a reduction in the number of helped reduce employee absence levels, 12% have disciplinary and grievance cases, 28% think there has seen a reduction in employment tribunal claims and been an improvement in employee morale and 25% 10% report a reduction in employee turnover. See believe there has been an increase in team Table 9. Table 9: Benefits reported as a result of training or coaching in conflict management skills (% of respondents) Helped improve team performance/ productivity Helped improve team morale Helped reduce absence levels Helped reduce employee turnover Reduced the number of formal disciplinary and grievance cases Reduced the number of employment tribunal claims received Average Manufacturing and production Private sector services Non-profit organisations Public sector No impact Don t know Leadership and the management of conflict at work

18 HR practitioners also report significant benefits for individuals as a result of the delivery of conflict management training. Nearly half of respondents believe individuals are more comfortable and confident in handling conflict issues as they arise. More than a third of respondents say that training helped individuals achieve more positive outcomes for both parties when conflict occurs, while almost one in four report that conflict management skills training helped people perform better and avoid conflict in the first place. The survey found that if conflict is properly managed it can have positive effects in the workplace. When asked what good they personally have seen come of conflict, HR respondents point to a better understanding of others, improved working relationships and better solutions to problems. Almost a third of respondents say they have seen the creation of more productive work environments as a result of effectively managed conflict. See Table 10. At an organisational level, one in three (34%) HR practitioners say that better teamwork is the single biggest potential gain as a result of the effective management of conflict, followed by higher employee engagement at 30% and improved productivity and greater internal efficiency at 12%. Respondents were asked to identify what they regard as the most significant potential benefit for their organisations from managing conflict effectively. See Table 11. Table 10: Positive outcomes personally experienced by respondents as a result of effectively managed conflict at work (% of respondents) Average Manufacturing and production Private sector services Non-profit organisations Better understanding of others Increased motivation Better solution to a problem/challenge A major innovation/idea was generated Improved working relationships A more productive environment No positive benefits experienced Public sector Table 11: The biggest potential benefits for organisations that manage disputes in the workplace effectively. Respondents (%) identifying the following as the single most important potential gain for their organisation as a result of effective conflict management. Manufacturing Private and sector Non-profit Public Average production services organisations sector Higher engagement people would be more consistently committed to their work Improved productivity people would be more focused and results-oriented Better teamwork Enhanced retention Better customer service Greater internal efficiency Improved work life balance Leadership and the management of conflict at work 17

19 Conclusions Conflict between individuals is an unavoidable part of working life. However how disputes are managed will determine whether there is positive resolution or damaging fallout for both employees and the organisation. Nearly half of HR practitioners responding to the survey report they manage conflict continually or frequently, spending an average of nearly 160 hours per year each, dealing with individual employment disputes. To a significant degree this conflict is caused by failure to manage interpersonal relationships effectively, poor leadership from the top of the organisation and inadequate line management. In addition threequarters of HR practitioners surveyed are not satisfied with managers effectiveness in handling workplace conflict. A problem identified by the CIPD 2007 Managing Conflict at Work survey report is that organisations are increasingly relying on their HR departments to manage conflict as managers shy away from tackling disputes in case they do or say something that might be held against them during any formal proceedings. This approach is counterproductive; by the time a dispute has escalated to the point where the disciplinary procedure has been triggered or a formal grievance lodged, opinions are often hardened. Worse, confrontational stances on both sides have developed that are very hard to change. To prevent this it is essential that HR practitioners ensure that managers at all levels have the skills, knowledge and confidence to identify and manage workplace disagreements at an early stage. Poorly managed conflict is a major cost to the business, with half or more of respondents citing sickness absence, staff turnover and bullying and/or harassment as the consequences of dispute escalation in the workplace. Where training in conflict management has been delivered, HR practitioners identify a range of benefits for the business including improvements in team morale and productivity and a reduction in the number of formal disciplinary and grievance cases. Managing conflict at work for line managers is an integral part of good people management. Managers must be sensitive to how their employees are interacting, as well as how they are handling any increase in their workloads or organisational change. Managers need also to be confident in intervening at an early stage if there are signs that employees are in dispute, or there is any hint of bullying behaviour emerging, or of indications that anyone is suffering from stress. Managers are best placed to establish the cause of any problem as soon as it emerges and find a resolution before attitudes have hardened and confrontational stances have had time to develop. The CIPD has produced a managing conflict at work competency framework following research jointly sponsored by the CIPD and the Health and Safety Executive involving interviews with nearly 400 managers and employees, which identified the most important management behaviours for helping managers prevent and manage conflict in the workplace. See Table 12 on page Leadership and the management of conflict at work

20 Management competencies for managing conflict at work Monitoring team relationships and managing the individual In any team there will be tensions or disagreements that arise from time to time, but managers should be aware of signs that serious disputes are developing and whether any individual s behaviour or performance is creating disharmony. Managers must also be aware that different personality types will deal with conflict in different ways. Some people will show their annoyance very quickly and openly by confronting someone as soon as their behaviour bothers them, or making their displeasure over work issues very clearly known. Other people may on the surface appear more laidback and tolerant but will be gradually getting increasingly unhappy with a colleague, their manager or a work problem until they lose their temper spectacularly, often over something quite minor that has proved to be the last straw. Some individuals will sulk and become withdrawn when they have a grievance or cannot cope at work. This is why managers should try and get to know the employees in their team or department as people and find ways to have regular informal conversations to help pick up on the first signs of future conflict. Dealing with issues Managers must have the confidence to deal with issues as soon as they arise. Managers must be sensitive to when banter becomes bickering or when teasing starts to have a hurtful edge. Managers should not ignore underlying tensions that are developing in their teams. It is vital that managers have regular, informal one-to-one conversations with the people they manage so that these kinds of issues can be aired naturally where possible. However managers must also be prepared to be proactive and initiate informal discussions if they think a problem is brewing. Participative approach All managers should have informal mediation skills to allow them to step in and resolve disputes before they escalate. Managers can help individuals in dispute identify what is at the root of their disagreement, what they need to happen to resolve matters or move forward and any changes or compromises they re prepared to make in their behaviour or attitudes. Use of official processes Of course, although all efforts should be made to resolve workplace conflict informally at an early stage, there will be many instances where formal disciplinary action should be taken. Managers must not shy away from using the disciplinary process where an individual s misconduct or performance demands it. Managers should ensure that all employees understand the formal disciplinary and grievance procedures that are in place, while emphasising that efforts will be made to resolve matters informally wherever possible when disagreements arise. Acting as a role model Managers must be seen to set an example by following the organisation s policies and procedures, being consistent in how they deal with the team and not showing favouritism. As well as spelling out what behaviour is not tolerated managers should also demonstrate what positive behaviours employees should aspire to, both in terms of how they interact with each other and other people in the organisation, as well as customers, clients and the public. Integrity If managers are to create working relationships with the individuals that they manage which are based on mutual trust and respect, then they have to make sure they protect people s privacy and respect confidential information. People who trust their line manager are more likely to talk to them openly if they are having difficulties, whether in the workplace or at home, that might lead to or contribute to conflict at work. Managers who are not even-handed in how they manage people will create resentment and disharmony in the workplace and undermine employee engagement. Managers that fail to treat all employees with the same importance are also more vulnerable to being accused of discrimination regardless of the motivation behind the behaviour. Leadership and the management of conflict at work 19

21 Table 12: Managing conflict at work: a competency framework for line managers Action orientation Team focus Personal style Examples of manager behaviour Competency Positive Negative Dealing with issues Use of official processes Participative approach Monitoring team relationships Acting as a role model Integrity intervening quickly in cases of conflict dealing with conflict head on protecting employees by removing them from conflict situations removing a disruptive team member when necessary following up on conflicts after resolution communicating procedures and policies available to each employee use all available procedures to investigate incidents of abuse using official procedures to set an example of how seriously complaints are taken escalating issues to senior management where appropriate acting as a mediator in conflict situations speaking to each party individually bringing both sides together to communicate supporting both sides in a complaints procedure gather ideas of how to address the issue with the team being aware of tension and keeping it at a low level picking up on squabbles before they lead to conflict acknowledging when a team member is causing stress to others maintaining professionalism being clear about expectations of team conduct not tolerating backbiting in the team showing no interest in office politics or gossip keeping employee issues private and confidential treating all employees with the same importance avoiding confrontation leaving conflicts between team members to sort themselves out not addressing bullying allowing a situation to develop before intervening stepping in to intervene in conflicts without understanding the issues allowing a disruptive team member to return to the team making a complaint official before seeking to resolve locally making a complaint official against the complainant s wishes not following correct procedure in dealing with a conflict using red tape associated with procedure to discourage employees from making official complaints taking sides not giving equal time to each side of the conflict speaking to employees in a parent/child manner not listening to employee complaints n/a losing temper within discussions deliberately creating conflict in the team engaging in conflict with other managers engaging in conflict with employees making public where complaints have come from bullying employees threatening employees unfairly with disciplinary action 20 Leadership and the management of conflict at work