The five conflict styles of creative teams
Conflict, in its many shades and forms, is an inevitable and necessary ingredient of any team. If everyone is on the same page, it can be challenging to push boundaries and explore new ideas. Meanwhile, different opinions clashing can lead to fruitless friction over growth.
Productivity and efficiency are the poster children of success in a traditional business context, and the notion of conflict seems like a dreaded side-effect of their bickering. There is a tendency to assume that disagreements only serve as a challenge that hinders the ideally smooth flow of teamwork. But what if I told you that internal dissent isn’t always a destructive force?
Granted, conflicts are part of the process and their underlying nature can shift team dynamics for better or worse. Whilst they can definitely temper the overarching common goal, we might just be selling their benefits short. Perhaps by getting up close and personal with the different faces of disharmony, it will become less daunting to handle.
It’s not me, it’s you
There are generally two types of conflict we should differentiate in this setting: task-related and relational.
When we encounter disagreements due to contrasting opinions, ideas, or approaches to a given problem, we are talking about task-specific conflict. This also involves divergent takes on how to perform a job or what decision would be the most optimal in a given situation.
Relational conflict encompasses, well, relationships and all things interpersonal. For most of us, this might be the type of drama we imagine when we hear the word conflict. This concerns how we relate to others and how our personalities mix in a, for example, work environment.
The general bottom line seems to be that task-related conflict improves team performance (due to it being a certain form of brain-storming), whereas the relational kind is detrimental to it. Whilst in some cases this might be true, a meta-analysis from 2003 concluded this is not actually accurate.
In an attempt to make things a bit less confusing, let’s look at both sides of the argument, so you get to decide for yourself which parts of the research might serve you well.
Maslow chimes in
If you apply Maslow’s theory to the workplace, you might find this already brings us to the third basic need: a sense of belonging. Once a group has formed, people usually proceed towards seeking out achievements, and then finally, reaching self-actualisation by honing their talents and creativity.
Witnessing ideas flourish is rarely a pressing concern. The problem arises when individual perspectives clash, generating strife instead of solutions.
Hence, to get the most out of a creative team, it is also important to understand and be aware of the different conflict styles that are present. Discord can actually be used as leverage if approached from a slightly more strategic and less alienated mindset.
These are the five main conflict styles that are commonly seen in teams:
1. Competing
When team members see conflict as a zero-sum game, and are only interested in winning, it comes as no surprise that the work environment becomes a Spartan battlefield. This can lead to an atmosphere of competition and mistrust within the group.
This approach is characterised by assertive and non-cooperative tendencies — a power struggle, if you will. It’s the age-old cycle of wanting to push others down, so one can rise above. In short? Not the most effective style to adapt or tolerate. Everyone should aim to check their egos at the door.
2. Accommodating
This occurs when people are more interested in preserving relationships than in winning arguments. They may do this by giving in to others’ demands or by agreeing to compromise solutions. It all sounds great so far. Nonetheless, this can lead to a feeling of being taken advantage of, or misunderstood within the team.
As you may have guessed, this manner is non-assertive and cooperative. It fosters harmony and supports a more positive atmosphere, however it prioritises other opinions over one’s own, which can brew resentment.
3. Avoiding
This approach takes the stage when individuals try to refrain from addressing conflict altogether. They may do so by withdrawing from discussions or by not speaking up when there is disagreement. This can result in a lack of open communication and collaboration within the team.
Avoidance is both non-assertive and non-cooperative, as it is overall just a state of passive compliance. Still, it can be useful when finding a solution is urgent and confrontation would not contribute to an already laid-out and workable plan.
4. Compromising
Compromising translates to team members willingly giving up some of their own needs to meet in the middle. This can be an effective way to resolve conflict, but it may also lead to a feeling of dissatisfaction if people feel like they have not gotten what they wanted.
“None of us is as smart as all of us.” — Kenneth H. Blanchard
It partially satisfies most parties involved and works well in scenarios where different goals are equally important. Trade-offs are part of this conflict style, but it leads to a solution that caters to everyone’s needs to some degree.
5. Collaborating
A collaborative mindset thrives when individuals view conflict as an opportunity to find the best possible solution. In this scenario, they are ready to openly discuss their different opinions and ideas in order to reach a consensus. This can inspire more creative and effective solutions, but it requires a high level of trust and respect within the team.
Assertive and collaborative, this style is perfectly suited for exploring various flavours of creative problem-solving where everyone’s needs are taken into account.
Feeling conflicted?
To summarise, here is a quick recap:
- Competing can push a team to come up with some of their best ideas, however, it can also lead to tension and conflict.
- Accommodating allows team members to maintain relationships, but can stifle creativity.
- Avoiding can keep the peace, nonetheless at the cost of possibly preventing important issues from being addressed.
- Compromising can lead to a balanced outcome, yet sometimes results in a watered-down solution.
- Collaborating allows team members to share their ideas and work together towards a common goal, resulting in the best possible outcome for the group.
Confront your comfort for idea generation
Creative confrontation can be a powerful tool for growth and change. It can help you challenge yourself and others to think outside the box, and to come up with new approaches. Open discussions can foster greater understanding and collaboration, as well as a deeper level of respect for each other’s perspectives.
In terms of team environment, this 2010 study by Badke-Schaub and colleagues suggested that
„creative performance in teams is not achieved mainly by agreement but needs cognitive confrontation.”
Basically, play nice but make your ideas heard. Creative confrontation is all about pushing boundaries and taking risks. It requires having the courage to express your ideas, even if it means contradicting fellow team members.
However, keep in mind that disagreements shouldn’t be used as a means to undermine others. Instead, consider it a way to open up a dialogue, challenge assumptions, and ultimately find a better way forward.
Do you agree?
Meanwhile, agreeableness is considered a crucial predictor of sustaining team productivity. Smoother information coordination and the ability to build more efficient relationships both contribute to a better workflow.
For example, one study found that participants were more creative in their solutions and more flexible in their thinking when they expected low levels of conflict with another individual.
When they anticipated a more competitive and hostile negotiation, their creative thinking took a toll. By having to fend for themselves, their cognitive load increased, leaving little space for creativity under the weight of added stress.
Another research paper suggested that people who are more or less on the same level in agreeableness are likely to get along. Team members with a similar tendency toward being disagreeable can work together just as fine as those who are less abrasive.
How is this possible? Once people of the same ilk gauge one another to be dissident to a comparable degree, they know what to expect and this builds a mutual understanding of arguments being inevitable. This makes them more receptive to each others’ differing opinions, which actually leads to less conflict of the destructive kind.
As the authors of the study, Lee and Park, put it:
“Their differences on task-related opinions would be less likely to be attributed to their personality differences, since they are, in fact, similar (at least for the personality trait of agreeableness), which would in turn likely produce more favourable and productive responses to one another.”
Circling back to shared mental models
If, by the end of this pro-con session you are craving a silver bullet, I might actually have just that. I covered shared mental models previously, which a 2015 study cites as the cure for fewer internal team battles and increased efficiency within teams.
The authors suggest that “high shared mental models are related to low levels of intra-group conflict, foster creativity, and in turn improve team performance and satisfaction.”
One way to go about this is by all team members engaging in a collective planning process before tackling the problem. Holding space for everyone and involving them in goal-setting and decision-making steps should be a fair start.
Thanks for reading! ❤️
If you liked this post, follow me on Medium for more!
References & Credits:
- Carnevale, P. J., & Probst, T. M. (1998). Social values and social conflict in creative problem solving and categorization. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(5), 1300.
- De Dreu, C. K., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied Psychology, 88(4), 741.
- Badke‐Schaub, P., Goldschmidt, G., & Meijer, M. (2010). How does cognitive conflict in design teams support the development of creative ideas?. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(2), 119–133.
- Lee, S. T., & Park, G. (2020). Does diversity in team members’ agreeableness benefit creative teams?. Journal of Research in Personality, 85, 103932.
- Santos, C. M., Uitdewilligen, S., & Passos, A. M. (2015). Why is your team more creative than mine? The influence of shared mental models on intra‐group conflict, team creativity and effectiveness. Creativity and innovation management, 24(4), 645–658.
- Images by storyset on Freepik
