As a high level introduction it could be fine. Otherwise, the presentation feels encyclopedic, abstract, status quo and self-justifies the whole message as if the conflict is the goal. In other words, you think you are now "competent" with it and you look forward to any opportunity you could use to showcase your skills. BTW, there is Conflict Resolution Matrix as a better alternative to 16:37. My next step would be for you to refocus your awareness on fatigue (physical or decision), frustration, complacency, 7C of communication, capacity/demand, acumen, mojo, astuteness/negotiation, connection/stakeholders, transparency, flow, sources of variation, focus on safety (investment/readiness) rather than risk (fear) and so on. My advice: conflict is something that is too late i.e. you shoul fix problems earlier, upstream or restructure your system. Your system is built to follow the path of least resistance (including conflicts). Instead focus on relevance (needs) and flow (meeting those needs).
I wanted to agree with some of the things you were saying, but you lost me at the end. Either reality is going to come smashing into your expectations or else you consciously or subconsciously use a dominating power/rank resolution style to pressure others. I understand that frontloading upstream can mitigate some potential conflict, but you're crazy if you think conflict can just be fully wiped away in all tasks and processes.
@@xnerobellum3031 Thank you for your reply. If I could understand your context better I could offer you something more specific/relevant. In a dysfunctional (dominating power) environment problems get "fixed" downstream. Usually, the most pressing problem in a dysfunctional environment is the one of capacity i.e. there is a constant lack of something. Whilst the capacity is the major problem the solution lies in understanding what causes it. In most dysfunctional places the levels of stress, frustration, feeling overwhelmed/underwhelmed, constant fatigue goes through the roof. One cannot fix dysfunctional problems by reacting to them. What you could do is: sort out your support systems, make them more "whole", and reliably repeatable. Multiskill people to feel like pilots or drivers. A person jumps into a car, orients himself/herself: petrol, lights, breaks, and starts driving. Next, "Job shadow" critical people (do not send them to "Conflict Resolution" course - just offer them some major tips), as if studying an ant colony: observe, assist, keep track of issues, make the list public, put it on a wall (low cost solution, WIP) - as a constant reminder, introduce fair solutions. Allow them to break the rules wisely. Turn events into patterns by using public visual calendar, jast a large A0 or A1 sheet of paper. That will acknowledge people concerns without condemning anyone, and you will be able to fix a pattern not people. Then, ask your best staff to map all major processes (establish flow) the rest will simply welcome it, the world will start making sense to them. Identify natural break points so that people could go home with a sense of fulfilment to recharge and spend valuable time with their families. Identify critical characteristics for each type of work so that you can manage them at a higher level of decision making and weed out major incompatibilities transparently and inclusively. Throughout the change process you will have to deal with internal constraints: capacity, variation, confidence, competence - it is a never ending job. The only difference is that as you get better your competitors will fall behind (until they catch up again). And so on. In the above scenario, I would call "conflicts" learning exchanges/ opportunities. Do not stop there, add to that open book management (business acumen), amoeba management (more leaders/owners), constraints management, understand concepts of ignorance, arrogance, etc. Decentralise management in a way that everybody is responsible for something but no-one owns the whole thing individually. Benefit from constant feedback, good connections and timely communication at multiple levels (gather timely business intelligence). You do not want a soccer team of eleven goal keepers, do you? Your major concern should be that people improve the system/business layer that they are managing. If they decide to leave you both benefit: you have a great working system (Toyota style), and they have a great knowledge. If they leave, and you practice multi-skilling, just let a new pilot take the seat. If you read a lot, at some point you will have to decide when is your turn to start making sense as - you - understand it. The only and best thing you can change is you. The knowledge domain is huge. Remain open minded, be curious and creative and trust yourself. That will also keep you safe from dangers of your powerful reptilian and emotional brains taking control over you. By all means grow your followers. We like equals.
