Case Studies

The CEO of a manufacturing company, Bill, inherited a management team riddled with conflict. He hired us to facilitate an executive retreat with his team. We did an exercise that we frequently use with groups where we draw a time line for the organization and have each person chart their own high and low on the time table, Bill was astounded to hear that many of the low points on the others’ time table involved descriptions of his associates suffering through one of his blistering attacks. As the head of his operations department put it: “Listening to feedback from Bill about the Casey project was not only the lowest day at the company, it was the lowest day of my entire life.”

First on your preparation list for dealing with conflict should be to consider whether you are dealing with a process problem or a content problem. For example, a CEO and his chief financial officer came to us complaining about their long-running battles. The CFO—younger and female—liked to debate the finer points of every financial statement and quarrel about how things should be reported. She relished arguments and details. The CEO often reacted quickly and intensely to her. He didn’t have time for all those details, he told us. He just wanted her to handle their problems.

One of our client companies is a construction company that experienced phenomenal growth over the past five years, starting with a gross in the low six figures and expecting in the current year a gross of $16 million. Don, their young leader, had worked hard to build an effective team, reward good work, and involve everyone in major decision-making. With the slowdown in the economy, however, the business started to experience cash flow problems. New accounts still flocked to Don’s company because of their excellent reputation, but clients paid slower and fought more over seemingly insignificant mistakes.

A few years ago, we were hired to coach a female manager named Lily who worked for a large corporation and had long-standing conflicts with two men — powerful people in the organization — that she had never resolved. She managed to work her way up to a vice presidency, and these two men also ended up being vice presidents in this organization. Lily didn’t like them. In fact, she couldn’t stand them, but believed she was hiding her feelings.

The managing partner of a large Midwestern law firm, Lewis, sought our advice after a young associate complained of sexual harassment by one of their most prominent, successful, and politically connected partners. Because the young woman had a reputation of being “emotionally volatile,” as well as “a bit seductive,” the other partners and associates refused to believe her claims. In addition, the firm was proud of its record of hiring and promoting women so they were loathe to admit that there might be any problems.

We coached an attorney, Joe, who was a powerful partner in a major law firm. All of the associates and many of his partners were afraid of him. Yet, when we talked with Joe we sensed a great sadness. After many probing questions, he finally admitted: “None of the associates like me; they won’t even talk with me. They call me the ‘prince of f——darkness’!” This powerful person, like most of us, had a deep need to connect.

We were hired by a large firm to mediate a dispute between two female associates. The firm valued both women for their hard work and intelligence, yet the two constantly tangled instead of working as a team.

We were brought in to help a larger HR department manage a simmering dispute between old and new members. The old managers saw themselves as serving the more traditional role of employee advocates. The old VP, Joe, came from an employer relations background and emphasized representing employee needs. The newer members of the department aligned with Ron, a new high-powered executive vice president of HR, and saw themselves as strategic business partners who needed to serve the highest-ranking manager of whatever business unit they were assigned to.

We recently worked with a financial institution that wanted to revamp its process for loan approval. Committees met for months without success, trying to understand why the process took so long, engendered so many disagreements, and created so much customer dissatisfaction.

In our experience in trying to resolve workplace conflicts, people frequently focus on vague personality characteristics rather than on what they specifically want. Someone might insist, for example, that the other person is a rude jerk who shouldn’t be allowed to walk the planet and doesn’t respect him or her.

One of our clients asked us to help them revamp their group brainstorming process. Although this large financial institution had effectively utilized this method to design creative financial packages in the past, as the Company grew, the process stalled. Debates dragged on endlessly, participation waned, and people groaned when invited to participate in a meeting using their brainstorming methodology.