The Conflict Paradox

At a Disrupt HR conference I was introduced to a really stimulating concept about the idea of the 'Conflict Paradox' by one of the speakers, Sandra Walden Pearson. Sandra kindly referred me onto this article which discusses the paradox a bit more as part of a short book review.

The Conflict Paradox - Seven Dilemmas at the Core of Disputes, Bernard Mayer

The idea here is that Bernard identifies seven paradoxes that frame how people tend to compose their approaches to different situations. The assumed general consensus being that one needs to be on a articular side of the fence with one of these elements.

1. Competition and Cooperation
2. Optimism and Realism
3. Avoidance and Engagement
4. Principle and Compromise
5. Emotions and Logic
6. Neutrality and Advocacy
7. Community and Autonomy

On the outset, each of these items appear polar opposites and mutually exclusive. What I found really interesting however is that Bernard does not describe them as contradictions at all but rather "codependent realities".  

This all builds off the concept of moving from a win-lose scenario to a win-win scenario where experienced negotiators are able to intellectually manage both of these elements at the same time.

As HR professionals we are often provided with situations where we appear to be presented with conflicting elements. Take for instance a flexible work arrangement, where one party is seeking flexibility in work patterns while the other wants to maintain productivity as per standardised norms. From one point of view these a contradictory, however as HR professionals we know that flexibility is an excellent avenue to actually boost productivity. A 2013 Ernst & Young report on The role of women in unlocking Australia's productivity potential is a great paper discussing flexibility.

It's interesting to consider situations were particularly skilled practitioners would be able to both identify and then capitalise on both of these codependents in order to achieve a net gain for both sides. Obvious examples come up around considerations with enterprise bargaining for instance where employers and unions can be firmly pushing their relative position built on the foundations of one of these elements (competition, principle, advocacy...)

I'll have to save a more detailed review for when I have had the chance to read further. In the meantime it's interesting to consider how one can manage complex situations by challenging the conception that it needs even be a win-loss scenario - make it a win-win.

The impact of workplace bullying

I'd like to share one of my favourite videos on workplace bullying.

Australia has a specific definition of workplace bullying - that being repeated, unreasonable behaviour that creates a risk to health and safety. For those of you who like to go directly to the source, you can find that in s.789FD of the Fair Work Act 2009. This should be kept in mind when actioning bullying items in Australia but that aside, there are some very stimulating materials out there when you consider the matter in its broader sense. Some of these are below: 

One of the pieces I really enjoyed from the video is when it described key style differences between leaders and bullies. The punchline being, "bullying is not a leadership style, it is the opposite of leadership".

Workplace Leaders

Workplace Bullies

·    Leaders inspire and build functional teams.  ·    They value others, reward competence and encourage contribution.  ·    They set good examples, holding themselves to the same high standards they expect of others. ·    They aim for clarity, behave with integrity and maturity and take responsibility for their mistakes. ·    They let others work without interfering. ·    They resolve conflict.

·    Bullies erode and disrupt functional teams. ·    They may use team language but they’re not team players. ·    They devalue others, feel threatened by competent staff and stifle contribution. ·    They set bad examples and exhibit hypocrisy. ·    They pollute the workplace by projecting their own negative stuff onto others, creating confusion and uncertainty. ·    They lack integrity and maturity. ·    They lie and blame others to disguise their own failings. ·    They focus on petty fault finding. ·    They generate conflict and when their   bulling is rooted in personality problems, their behaviour is unlikely to change.

While we're on the subject of comparisons, I also want to share another piece I found particularly stimulating. Below is a table which explores the difference between Bullying and Harassment which I came across and understand to be the work of Tim Field, an activist in the area. 

While I don't necessarily fully agree with all of the points below, such as that it tends to be secret and without witnesses (I have seen examples to the contrary). I think this is a great piece that helps intellectually distinguish two terms that many people use interchangeably without really thinking about it.

Harassment	Bullying
Tends to focus on the individual because of what they are eg. Gender, race etc.	Anyone will do, especially if the bully feels threatened in some way.
Harassment is usually linked to sex, race, prejudice and discrimination etc.	These things play little part.
The person being harassed can usually identify it – particularly with the extent of awareness training conducted in defence.	The person being bullied may not realise it for weeks or months.
Most people can recognise harassment.	Few people recognise bulling.
Harassment will often reveal itself through the use of recognised offensive language.	Workplace bullying tends to fixate on trivial criticism and false allegations under performance. Swearing may be done in private.
The harasser often perceives the complainant as vulnerable to harassment or a challenge.	The complainant is seen as a threat and that must first be controlled and subjugated and, if that doesn’t work, eliminated.
Often harassment is for peer approval, bravado etc.	Apart from initiations, tends to be secret, behind closed doors and with no witnesses.
Harassment takes place both in and out of work.	Bullying takes place largely at work.
Harassment is often domination for superiority.	Bullying is for control of threat (of exposure of inadequacy.)
The harasser often lacks self discipline.	The bully is driven by envy (of abilities) and jealousy (of relationships)

Pay your employees to sleep?

Came across an quick little Human Capital article worth sharing:

Aetna, a US health insurance company has implemented a novel sleep program where they provide Fitbit fitness trackers to help promote healthy sleep patterns for their employees.

If they can prove they get 20 nights of sleep for seven hours or more in a row, we will give them $25 [$33 AUD] a night, up to $500 [$661AUD] a year

They have statistics to prove they're on the right track as well. Atena's CEO claims that employees improved their productivity by 69 minutes each month as a direct result of participation in the program.

I did a little research and it appears Atena has around 5,700 employees. It would be interesting to know if this is being rolled out across the whole organisation or just departments - do staff bring their own FitBits? There may be some privacy implications as well...

Overall however, I think this is a fantastic idea.  One of my first reservations was how this might fairly integrate with employees who have career duties such as flexible working parents. Turns out they thought of that too as the 7 hours are not continuous and can include naps.

It reminds me of a short story a senior manager once told me that stuck. Essentially it was a tale about two woodcutters who were working away when one notices the other is quickly outpacing his productivity and even finishing early. Turns out the productive woodcutter sharpens his axe at the end of each day.

A nice story stressing the importance of tackling presenteeism and taking time to develop your skills / having rest to boost genuine productivity. It's important as HR professionals we drive a culture that encourages people to sharpen their axe rather than just swing harder with a blunt instrument.