Communicating Through Conflict: How to Get Along with Anyone

Full Transcript

Note: Transcripts are generated by machine and lightly edited by humans. They may contain errors.

Matt Abrahams: Many of us seek to keep conflict out of our work, but counterintuitively conflict can actually help us be better at work. My name is Matt Abrahams and I teach Strategic Communication at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Welcome to Think Fast Talk Smart, the podcast. Today I look forward to speaking with Amy Gallo. Amy is a workplace expert who writes and speaks about gender, interpersonal dynamics, difficult conversations, feedback, and effective communication. She’s the author of Getting Along: How to Work with Anyone, even Difficult People, and the HBR Guide to Dealing With Conflict, and she co-hosts HBR’s popular Women at Work podcast. Amy, thanks for being here.

Amy Gallo: Thanks for having me. I feel like we’re going to have a lot to talk about.

Matt Abrahams: Oh, I agree, and I’m so excited to get started. Are you ready?

Amy Gallo: I’m Ready.

[01:00]
Matt Abrahams: Many of us see conflict as bad as something that we should avoid. Can you give us your thoughts on conflict and its importance in relationships, teams and organizations?

Amy Gallo: Yeah, it’s funny you’d think that I would be brought in to situations, organizations, teams where people are having too much conflict, but it’s actually quite the reverse. I’m often brought in because there’s not enough disagreement happening, there’s not enough feedback, not enough tension or friction, and I am a big believer that while our natural human instinct is to avoid conflict, because of course we are hardwired for likability and we see conflict as a potential rupture in our relationship or possibly damaging to our reputation, I actually believe that conflicts are not only inevitable part of interacting with other humans, but they’re a necessary part. There’s lots of research that shows that conflict leads to better work outcomes, stronger relationships, and of course that depends on navigating the conflict in a professional, productive, relational way with compassion and caring. But when done well, conflict has a whole host of good outcomes, both for our relationships, most certainly for teams, and as well for organizations. And I think we actually should be spending more time not trying to eliminate conflict, but trying to create the right kinds of conflict.

Matt Abrahams: Wow, I love that you’re brought in to talk about how to actually facilitate effective conflict. What are some of the things we can do to bring around what you call the right type of conflict? How do we do that?

[02:39]
Amy Gallo: Well, one, I think we have to normalize conflict, right? So I’m sure you’ve been in this situation where you’re in a team meeting and someone disagrees with someone, someone says, or maybe is a slightly dismissive or just something starts to happen and the whole room just gets tense, right? And everyone feels like, oh gosh, well, how are we going to deal with this? And some people may immediately try to smooth it over. It might devolve quickly. The reality is we don’t make conflict normal. We don’t say we’re going to disagree. We’re not going to see eye to eye all the time. We should be debating ideas. And that’s the first step I think for teams and organizations. We want leaders who say, conflict’s going to happen. That’s good. We want the tensions. We want people to disagree about the best way to roll out this project or the right way to design a feature for our customers.

We want that disagreement and we want it to be about the ideas, not about the people. And I think that’s the key part is that when conflicts happen, we immediately think, oh, Matt and Amy aren’t getting along. Oh, there’s going to be a fight. What’s going to happen here? And we immediately think it’s you versus me as opposed to, oh wow, Matt really cares about speed. Matt is always the one who really puts the pedal to the metal, wants us to get there fast, whereas Amy is pressing on the brakes saying No highest quality product possible. Those are good tensions to have. We’re glad Matt and Amy are debating this because we’ll figure out the right way to proceed if we keep it on that level of ideas. The other thing I think is really key is I go back always to Amy Edmondson or at Harvard Business Schools work around psychological safety. You really need to have psychological safety on your team in order to have these disagreements, right? We talk about admitting mistakes, speaking up without fear of retribution or fear of negative consequences. If people are going to feel comfortable enough to say, you know what, Matt, I’m not sure I see that the same way. Let’s talk it through. That is a potential risk to our relationship, so it’s going to cause a disruption, but we have to normalize those disruptions and give people permission to raise them.

[04:45]
Matt Abrahams: So there’s a lot that we can do to set up in our relationships, be they in our personal life or in our work life, to actually facilitate conflict that is actually productive. So establishing psychological safety makes a lot of sense. Amy was a guest on the podcast, and I encourage everybody to listen in to the specifics of how we can do that. We have to feel comfortable disagreeing, and then it sounds like those in power, the leaders of a group can acknowledge that conflict is good and recognize it when it’s happening. I like that example you gave where you say, Hey, these two people are in conflict and we need that conflict to help us stay of the course. And then clearly it’s really important that we focus on the problem or the issue and not the people, because once it becomes personal, the emotions can certainly change. So I really appreciate you helping us understand how we can set up an environment for positive conflict. Now, I’d like to have you help us when that conflict we’re having is not so positive. Can you share a framework or two for helping us navigate conflict that might not be the kind of conflict we really want to have?

Amy Gallo: Yeah, and the idea is not to eliminate conflict even if we feel like it’s unhealthy, but it’s to try to transform it into something more productive. Because usually even at the base of those unhealthy conflicts or those unproductive conflicts is something that needs to be resolved. So one framework I’ll share, and this is from my first book, the HBR Guide to Dealing with Conflict, is really thinking about before you even have a difficult conversation, say you have a conflict where you and the other person have been disrespecting each other, maybe there was a snarky email that got sent with lots of people CC’d on it, and you need to actually have a conversation before you do that. I recommend taking four steps, and these also, by the way, can be used as a coaching tool. So perhaps you’re a leader and someone comes to you and says, I’m having a conflict with so-and-So you can use these four steps to help that person think through the conflict as well.

[06:42]:
The first step is to think about the other person. So when we are under stress or when we have a threat, conflict is often seen as a threat, as a threat to our identity, to our resources, to the sense of harmony we have. When that happens, we become naturally narcissistic and we become focused on what do I want to say? What do I want to do? We don’t think about the other person, not out of generosity, but the very first step is to think strategically what’s going on with that other person? What’s motivating them? What do they care about? What would be a rational reason that they’re behaving this way? And that’s going to give you some cues as to how to navigate this not so healthy conflict. Put yourself in their shoes just for a few minutes. Then you want to think about what are we actually disagreeing about?

[07:27]:
Because sometimes we take these shortcuts, like the snarky email goes out and we’re like, oh, Matt and I have never gotten along. We have this total personality clash attributed to the person, or we make it bigger than it really is, and you have to really think what is at issue here, right? Are we disagreeing about the goal of this project? Are we disagreeing about status? Who actually gets to make the call? What do we actually disagree about? Really try to understand. Then the third step is to think about your goal. What is it that I actually want to achieve? You might be tempted to have a short-term goal. I just want to prove I’m right and he’s wrong, not helpful. What’s your long-term goal? What is it you? Is it that you need to get this project done on time? Is it that you want to preserve your relationship with the other person because you need to work closely together for the next six months?

[08:14]:
Whatever it is, focus on that and with that information, what you know about the other person, what you’re disagreeing about, what your goal is, you then make a decision about how to proceed. It has to be really thoughtful. I think we often act rashly because we’re sort of activated from the conflict, but you have to really be thoughtful. Does it make sense to sit down and talk this through? Who else might need to be in the room? Should I have a phone call if we’re remote, should I do a zoom meeting? Whatever it is, think through what’s the best way to set up this conversation for success. So that four step framework is something I always use whenever I’m trying to coach someone who’s really uncomfortable in thinking, I don’t want to have this conversation, or I just want to tell them they’re wrong and have them fix it. So those four steps can help you be much more thoughtful about preparing and being ready for the conversation.

[09:06]
Matt Abrahams: One of the things I appreciate so much about your work is the frameworks that you provide, and I think frameworks are wonderful to help. Give us a moment to step back and reflect on what it is in terms of the best approach to managing these situations. I love that we first start by being other focused. It is so easy to get focused on our needs and what we want in that moment, and then to really look at what’s the source? What’s causing this conflict? What is it I want to achieve for me and perhaps for the other person or the organization. And then to really create a plan for how to proceed and then to think about when I actually do have the conversation, what’s the best way to do it in terms of timing, in terms of who else needs to be present and in terms of which is the best channel through which to have that communication really, really matters. I know for myself, when I’m in conflictual situations, I just want it to be over. I want to make sure that I get my way and I just want to move on. Having a framework like yours can really help slow me down and make me other focused, which I think will really help in resolving these conflicts.

Amy Gallo: Can I just make a comment? Having it my way is so normal, it’s so relatable. I mean, I’m thinking about a conflict I had yesterday and I was like, how can I set this up and truthfully, how can I manipulate this situation so it just goes my way? And then I was like, wait a second, I’m going to put this person completely on the defensive. This is all going to devolve, and then I’m going to have to have five more conversations instead of one in which I’m actually collaborative instead of manipulative. And so I think we really, that’s an important part is I often get asked, well, how can I make them do this? I was like, you cannot make them do anything, but what you can do is lay the groundwork for a collaborative discussion in which hopefully you both will get what you want or at least part of what you want. It’s rare to have a zero sum situation where you can’t sort of find something where you both can win a little.

[11:09]
Matt Abrahams: People can’t see that I’m smiling broadly because it does my heart well to know that an expert in conflict management still falls into some of the traps that I do. Something there that you said that I think is really critical that I want to call out is that the goal of these conversations is invitation rather than getting the person to be defensive, that you want to invite the person to work with you to solve the problem. It’s a collaborative effort rather than a manipulative effort where you’re just trying to work around the other person. And one of the biggest payoffs beyond collaboration is it ultimately saves you time because as you implied, if you just try to manipulate the situation, you then have to spend so much time cleaning up that mess. So there’s an incentive just in terms of efficiency, I think, in all of this.

Amy Gallo: Absolutely.

[11:56]
Matt Abrahams: Now, we’ve talked a lot about conflict and people that are difficult. I’d like to switch gears and look at the other side of the coin. In your book getting along, you share the benefits of having friends at work and actually seeking out those friendships. Can you shed some light on the benefits of having colleagues and friends at work, and what are some of your principles for how we can get along with anyone that we work with?

[12:22]
Amy Gallo: I love this question because I think we could spend all day talking through the patterns of behavior that drive us up a wall, but the reality is when you look at all of the stats, most people have a majority of positive relationships at work, or at least neutral. The problem is those negative relationships take up an outsized portion of our energy and emotion, and so we’re really thinking a lot about the difficult people when in reality we should be spending most of our time focusing on the more positive relationships because there’s lots and lots of research that shows that those positive relationships have such a huge benefit, not only emotionally on us, right? Of course, it feels good to have a best friend on work, but also creatively in terms of efficiency. One of my favorite pieces of research I found in working on the book was a group of researchers at Rutgers University found that people who reported having a best friend at work had higher performance ratings.

[13:20]
I think we often think about relationships as a bonus, right? Like, oh, I like the people I work with. Oh, how lucky you are. But the reality is it affects how we actually do our jobs. It’s not the icing on the cake. It is the cake. Now, that doesn’t mean that everyone at work has to be your best friends. You don’t have to go out for drinks. You don’t have to invite each other over for cookouts on the weekend. It just means you have to care about one another and be invested in one another’s success. That sort of warmth and benevolence between people really can make a big difference in how we experience work, but also in how we carry out and do the work.

[13:58]
Matt Abrahams: But I’m hearing you say as your friends help you lighten your load. That’s right. That’s amazing. I know I made a mistake early in my managerial career where my whole goal was to be liked. I just wanted people to like me to be my friends, and I over-indexed on that so much so that people would take advantage of me. I’d love for you to share some advice about how to actually foster friendships at work without going to the extreme as I did and actually end up not making friends and actually making life a little bit worse for those who are reporting to me.

[14:29]
Amy Gallo: So many people have been in your shoes, myself included, of if I’m liked, that is the gold. Every manager just wants to be everyone’s favorite manager. Why wouldn’t you want that? But if you think back to the managers you had, they weren’t necessarily my favorite managers. Sometimes it was actually the person who I didn’t have the warmest relationship with, but I respect it and I learned a lot and they pushed me. So I think really mentally thinking, focus on respect over likability. The other key piece is boundaries, and I think the issue there is you’re managing people, you’re becoming friends, and then you either feel taken advantage of, people start to perceive favoritism, all of those things that can happen, and that’s where you really need boundaries. In fact, I actually reported at one point in my career to someone who was a very good friend from college, and when we began our working relationship, we were very clear.

[15:22]
We’re like, we got to keep this separate for the perception of others. We don’t want us to be perceived as playing favorites or giving one another advantages, but also because we don’t want it to impact our friendship. If she called me, I would say I’d pick up and say, friend call or work call, and I think it was really clear, and when there were potential conflicts of interest, which there were sometimes we were very clear about, okay, how are we going to navigate this? And I think that has to be true even if your friend is your peer, right, have a conversation. It doesn’t have to be sort of this in depth define the relationship conversation, but it could be helpful to say, sometimes I’m going to have information that you’re not going to be privy to. Sometimes I’m going to have to make a decision that I know is not going to be something you’re going to be super happy with, but how do we want to handle that? When that comes up, how do we want to make sure our friendship stays intact and not impact the work relationships? So I think boundaries are really important.

[16:16]
Matt Abrahams: That is so helpful, and the notion of boundary setting is critical to those relationships, and you might set different boundaries with different colleagues, but having an overt, explicit conversation about the boundaries I think is critical, and certainly your advice to focus on being respected versus being liked is what I ultimately came to that conclusion, but it certainly had some, there were negative consequences before I learned that lesson, and in fact, the advice I give all new managers is focus on building trust, focus on building respect and liking often comes from that.

Amy Gallo: That’s right.

Matt Abrahams: Amy, this has been fantastic. I’ve enjoyed listening to all of your advice and guidance and it is so applicable in my daily life and I’m sure in the lives of the listeners we have. Before we end, I’d like to ask you three questions. One, I’m going to create just for you, and the other two are consistent across all of our guests. Are you up for answering?

Amy Gallo: Absolutely

[17:12]
Matt Abrahams: Great. I’d like for you to think back to a challenging or conflictual situation you’ve had and what are you most proud of in terms of how you handled it?

[17:23]
Amy Gallo: I have a 17-year-old daughter, and we talk about conflict a lot. What I’m realizing and what I’m most proud of in negotiating conflicts with her is being able to in the moment say, here are the various things that I’m struggling with. I want to be a good mom. I want to appear as a good mom. I want to care for you, and I also need my needs met, and to be able to talk through the conflicts of interest that have, it’s not always easy. Sometimes I’m just at level 10 and losing my mind, but when I can sort of take it down a few levels and actually be present enough to say, Hey, this is what’s going on, she’s so much more responsive because instead of being that know it all mom who’s just telling her what to do instead, I’m a real person who’s struggling saying, I don’t know what the best answer is, and this is why I’m doing what I’m doing.

[18:16]
Matt Abrahams: I think that is wonderful that you can do that, and I strive to do that. It can help in any interaction, not just with our kids to say, here are the things I’m struggling with in this moment, sounding real, and maybe even getting some advice and guidance to be more collaborative. Question number two, who is a communicator that you admire and why?

Amy Gallo: I have maybe a slightly strange answer, but there’s a comedian named TIG Nataro. She’s an interesting communicator. She speaks very slowly. She’s very dry, sense of humor. The other thing I like about the way she communicates, it’s delightful. She doesn’t always say what you expect, the element of surprise, not in a bad way because you can also really feel the authenticity and the intention behind what she says, and so the way that she sort of surprises you by reacting in a certain way or just sort of laying a joke that’s very relatable, very human. I always appreciate what TIG has to say.

Matt Abrahams: So it sounds like the conversational and surprising nature of the communication is what really attracts you to it. I think those are two criteria that can draw all of us into communication. We often can be very scripted and purposeful in everything we say, and sometimes having a little bit of surprise can be helpful. Final question for you, what are the first three ingredients that go into a successful communication recipe?

Amy Gallo: First, I would say empathy. I think ultimately communication is about balancing your needs and someone else’s needs. I would say assertiveness, actually knowing what you want to say and saying it confidently, and then curiosity. I really always try to lead with what do I not know that I want to know, and how do I communicate in a way that will help me get that

[20:01]
Matt Abrahams: Empathy, curiosity, and assertiveness. Great communication recipe. Start with what the others need, understand their perspective. Be curious about how you can connect and collaborate and then be clear and assertive in what you want. Amy, thank you so much for your time and for your guidance. I certainly have benefited personally in dealing with challenging situations. I appreciate your time and your information. Thank you so much.

Amy Gallo: Thank you, Matt. This has been really fun.

[20:34]
Matt Abrahams: Thanks for joining us for another episode of Think Fast Talk Smart, the podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business. This episode was produced by Jenny Luna, Michael Reilly, and me Matt Abrahams. For more information and episodes, visit gsb.stanford.edu or subscribe to our show wherever you get your podcasts. Finally, find us on social media at StanfordGSB.