Welcome to the fourth article in my ‘Leadership in Marketing Cloud‘ series. I created this series to address a major gap in reference to and documentation around leadership inside the specific context of Marketing Cloud. When I searched through the community and official places, there was nothing really available!
Please reference here for all the articles currently available for this series.
In the last few articles, we went over the basics of leadership and the fundamentals of figuring out how you can be a leader and what you should do to become one. With all that background completed, we are ready to dive into more practical and heavier topics. To kick things off, we will be diving into probably one of the worst aspects of being a leader: Tough Conversations and Conflict Resolution.
With the current state of the market, where we are faced with large amounts of lay-offs and other struggles at each corporation, I thought it might be a relevant topic to discuss. My hope in this is not only to give insights to leaders on how to handle and prepare for these situations, but also help those who are not leaders better understand the situation the leader is placed in when these things happen.
Conflict Resolution
To be fair, there are a ton of articles, trainings and even books on this topic that share very specific and well thought out plans and activities. That is not what I want to do here. My goal here is more to give a look at what exactly conflict resolution is and my opinions on how to handle it.
Conflict Resolution, as defined by Harvard University is “the informal or formal process that two or more parties use to find a peaceful solution to their dispute.” Which is a fairly good definition, if a bit bland. I find Conflict Resolution is more a problem-solving activity – but your goal is not to solve for blame or fault, but instead to find a better path forward for all involved.
Although in most conflicts you have the ability to find right and wrong, you have to realize that this concept is subjective and what you feel is wrong, can be viewed as right by someone else with different information. This is why you need to remove personal feelings and not focus on consequences or fault. Instead, the focus should be on getting through the conflict and repairing the break. Removing right and wrong and the subjective viewpoints will steer away from what created the conflict to begin with. To try to create a ‘winner’ or a ‘loser’ will likely just bring about more conflict.
So, this then leads to the question, what causes a conflict?
What causes Conflicts?
Let’s start off with an example:
In this case, the rift happened because of two clashing viewpoints being shared in a workplace. Could you view this as Susan should not have made those comments because she knew George was a part of that culture and felt very proud of that culture? Absolutely, but that was not the cause we should focus on, because the reverse could be seen as a cause as well and George should have respected Susan’s right to her opinion and not taken it personally. The cause is usually related to many different aspects combined with a subjective mentality and view of what people feel is right or wrong.
In a work environment, people should feel safe to share their opinions and viewpoints – the key part though is this should be in a respectful and constructive way. So, although the comment was a root cause, it was not the fact that she made the comment that was the problem, but instead how the comment was stated and perceived. With the comment being made in a very negative light and showing no respect to George’s belief or viewpoint, she turned this from simply an opinion to an opinion that could be perceived as a disrespectful personal attack on George.
On the other side though, should George refuse to work with someone just because they share separate beliefs and views on things outside the work environment? No, not really. This is a bit of a grey area though, because it can lead to personality conflicts, which will then cause disruption to productivity as well as the potential to create a more toxic environment overall. People tend to like taking sides and that can lead to a major rift with each side refusing to fully collaborate together anymore.
Although this is a grey area, you cannot have someone refusing to work with another teammate over something like they are a ‘left Twix’ and the co-worker is a ‘right Twix’. That is something unrelated to the workplace and can easily be avoided being entered into the workplace environment. Which, in all honesty, the above example falls into this category more than not.
So, with all of the above considered, when should you get involved?
Recognizing when you need to get involved.
Getting involved to help resolve conflict is a hard thing to know. A lot of times, getting involved in a conflict can escalate it and potentially make it worse. By jumping in, you may actually turn the two parties from having a conflict with each other and instead they are now in a conflict with you. But at the same time, if you sit idly by for too long, things can also escalate quickly and get out of hand where simple resolution is no longer possible and things may need to become extreme, potentially even punitive.
My best advice is to get involved early but do so as a supportive entity – instead of trying to solve it, you place yourself there to be an ear to listen and to check on their feelings and state of mind. Sometimes just letting someone vent about their frustrations and having someone to talk to is all that is needed. Letting them know that you care about their feelings and thoughts and that it is ok to be a human and stand up for what you believe in is enough for the situation to calm down enough that each party can quickly find a resolution together. This way you are not getting involved in the problem itself, reducing likelihood of escalation – but instead getting involved with the people that are having the issue.
Now you are involved…what do you do?
After this initial touch base as a supportive entity, you will want to keep an eye on the issue and monitor its progress (I recommend keeping a regular touch-base with each person, whether 1:1s or via a chat service) and if it does continue to build – then you will need to take more direct action. At this point, you should now have all the information on the conflict from both sides and their points of view. The best next step is to come to each person individually and express the point of view of the other and see if calmly explained context and intent can help make each person see the other’s point of view and be ready to mediate on a solution. This allows an introduction of opposing viewpoints that can help humanize the ‘opposition’ and make it less of an ‘us vs them’ mentality.
With the groundwork laid and both sides have all the facts, you will need to find the next appropriate action. I would say the most important thing is to, once again, ensure there is no right/wrong or punitive damages, if possible. Obviously, anything malicious, illegal or far out of compliance will require corrective and disciplinary action, but outside of those, it is best to refrain from that approach.
The focus here is to find how to ensure we can move forward and prevent an issue like this in the future.
Apologies are great things, but it usually is best if they are a two-way street. Both should apologize to the other for the conflict (degrees of apology may vary) to help keep things fair for both. These apologies should be given by the individual to the other person at the volition of the individual, and not forced or public. Public apologies can be demeaning and can affect the viewpoints of others on the team – potentially leading to further conflict. The focus here is to find how to ensure we can move forward and prevent an issue like this in the future.
Based on the example, I would say the path forward would be to have separate discussions with both George and Susan after the initial contact and they have ‘cooled off’ a bit. When talking with each of them, you should emphasize that each of them are human and each have strong feelings, but that does not mean they cannot work together anymore. By showing that constructive and positive discourse can help each find a way to better communicate and respect each other should hopefully help them resolve the conflict. At that point you then mediate a discussion between them and hopefully a way forward is opened up and the conflict is put to bed.
On the rare occasion that mediation at the leader level fails, you will then need to escalate to Human Resources via your company’s policy and assist them in finding the proper solution. But I would push this as a last resort as this makes everything ‘official’ and can lead to documented actions or punitive measures that might significantly affect you and your team.
Handling the fallout
Now that you solved the conflict with the two parties, that does not mean that your job is done and it’s time to move on. Despite the conflict being solved, there is almost always still fallout from it afterwards. In this example, with the conflict between George and Susan – Susan may have found that the rest of the people on her team sided with George and felt she stepped out of line. This will then cause a rift between Susan and the team, which can affect how well they work together, even though George and her are no longer in conflict.
You will need to keep an eye on this and adjust work culture, habits and communications to help show that Susan is still Susan, and that George is still George. There are no enemies or bad people, just teammates and fellow human beings. We all do and say things that may hurt others, so we need to have the grace to forgive others as they have forgiven us.
Most of the handling done here is very subtle and passive. A lot of listening and monitoring along with positive mentions of how well Susan and George are doing and showing that the conflict is done, and we should all move forward from it, instead of letting it continue to cause issues.
Tough Conversations
To get right to it, this is about things like firing people, denying promotions or raise requests, lay offs, or even negative performance reviews. These conversations, as well as many other examples, are far from a favorite topic of discussion. Everyone wants to be that hero in shining armor providing everything each team member needs, but that is just not possible. As a leader, you are not just a representative of your team to the business, but also a representative of the business to your team. This means that sometimes you have to do things that will have a negative impact to your team to allow the business to thrive.
The best of leaders are the ones that can walk that line between and keep things balanced – reducing impacts pre-emptively through proper planning and foresight. Even with that effort and precision though, there will be times that things are out of your control, and you need to make tough decisions and have tough conversations.
This cause is not the only cause for tough conversations though. At times it could be the individual that is the catalyst. They could be performing actions that negatively impact the team or going against policy or other significant actions. It even could be caused by inaction from a team member, or even a co-worker. Sometimes when something falls between the cracks, this can have a huge impact that can lead to many negative repercussions.
Let’s move forward to the first step on handling these types of conversations.
Mentally preparing yourself
Having these conversations is not only tough on the individual you are talking to, but also on the leader. So, you need to do some preparation mentally for having to be the representative of these actions. Much like in customer service jobs, despite you likely not being the ultimate decision maker, you are the person there delivering the news. This tends to mean you get all the blame and have to handle all the fallout.
This can be especially tough as a lot of your feelings and comments need to be restricted. For instance, it is generally good practice not to apologize about the action or push blame to the company, regardless of how you feel or who the decision maker was. Doing either of those actions opens up many potential pitfalls and can misrepresent what is happening – potentially even opening up opportunity for legal action or further, even tougher conversations. You need to be empathetic, but firm. You cannot give the impression it is not a final decision or that it is on a whim and flippantly given.
To prepare, I would recommend taking some time and really thinking through exactly what is being asked of you and view it from every angle you can. This means you need to fully research the situation given all the information you have. From there, you should be able to get full clarity on what is going on and why – which should help you be able to wrap your mind around it. It is paramount that you understand why this is happening and the thought process behind it, you do not need to agree with it, but understanding is necessary. Without understanding, it will not let you fully be able to communicate to the individual what is happening nor give the firm approach you need.
Now that you have a clear picture and are in a stronger mental state, it is time to have a discussion with the business and see if there are any possible alternative solutions.
Advocation to the business and alternative solutions
As a leader, you are not completely powerless in these situations. Working with higher leadership and with HR, you can explore every path and see if there are alternatives that can be taken instead that may have a less negative impact. This is not always the case and sometimes, these alternatives can be worse (most businesses are not the heartless monsters that people like to view them as). But in any place where it makes sense, just having the conversation to see what the options are will be a great step to take. Even if you are sure the answer is that there are no options, just taking the time to advocate as best you can is something that will help your own conscious and mental state. The affected individual will likely never know what you did or how hard you fought, but it is still worth it for yourself.
Alternative solutions usually all come with an equivalent price tag to them and a different type of risk, you will need to consider which is the ‘lesser of two evils’ and best for your team
A key point to consider in investigation of alternatives is to always look at the future impacts, not just the immediate impact. So, if you find a way to avoid the conversation now, but because of that, in 2 months’ time it will be 3 times worse, then it might make more sense to continue on the current path instead. Sometimes avoiding impact to a specific person or during a specific time can have serious long-term issues. Sometimes it is also a heavy gamble with high risk/high reward. Alternative solutions usually all come with an equivalent price tag to them and a different type of risk, you will need to consider which is the ‘lesser of two evils’ and best for your team.
Preparation for the conversation
Now that we have mentally prepared and done everything we can to potentially prevent or change the situation, we see this conversation needs to happen. So, what do we do now? We script it out and practice it. Some places will provide you with a script for you to read, which is helpful, but many require you to do it all yourself. It is best to ensure what is written portrays understanding that this is a high impact event and show empathy for the strong feelings that will come from it. But at the same time, it needs to show this was a decision based on facts and reviewed by leadership and is a firm fact, not something that can be fought or negotiated around.
Once the script is written in a way that fits guidelines (if provided) and you feel comfortable with, you will then sit down and practice reading it many times. Even if it is to your cat, just speaking it out loud to someone or something will help it come off more naturally and seem less robotic on the call. Making it obvious you are reading a script is easily taken as you not putting time or effort into a major event in their lives. You are the one setting the mood and starting the conversation, so this first impression can have a major impact on how the news is received and how the conversation goes from there. Plus, as the conduit of the news, you owe it to the team member affected to present it to them in as professional and empathetic way as possible. You want to present it to them the same way you would want someone to present the same news to you.
Transparency to your team
Although the conversation and preparation are hugely important, how and what you share with your team afterwards is nearly as impactful. Although it may seem counter-intuitive to share some of the information, for instance sharing that you simply do not know if this is the last time a reduction may happen, I have always found giving straight and solid answers help to prevent rumors and anxiety that can eat away not just trust, but the feelings of safety and security for the team. They need to know that although times are uncertain, leadership is working with them and has their back as best as it can.
If you do not share information, people will fill that void with speculations and more often than not, misinformation.
For example:
I am a leader that thrives in transparency, but it can be a double-edged sword. Sometimes sharing information that makes sense from your point of view might be taken differently or misunderstood by others, leading to negative outcomes. As with all things as a leader, you need to make sure you think about everything you are going to say and make sure you present it in a factual way and fully explain context to ensure understanding. The impact of ‘bad’ transparency can be worse than the original issue. You, as a leader, need to learn when the right time is to be transparent, what is shareable and what is ‘protected’ information, and how to share the information. This is something that is really only learned through experience, but until then, I highly recommend talking with other leaders and asking questions on their approach to help you make your own decisions.
Conclusion
Conflict and tough decisions and conversations are inevitable as a leader. When looking to join a leadership position, it is something you need to consider, if it fits with who you are and what you can deal with. Leadership and Management have responsibilities and accountabilities that can force them to do things most would never want to do. This is why a leadership position is given that extra capability and insight. A good leader is someone who can take the bad with the good and use both to continually move the team and business forward.
I know this one is a bit of a downer topic, but a highly important one. The next article will be diving into how to handle your shift from a ‘doer’ to a ‘leader’ through delegation and team enablement. Thanks for reading and see you in the next one!