|
One of the greatest obstacles to resolving a difficult situation or conflict in the workplace—or in our personal relationships—is blame. Symbolic of how prevalent a blame approach is as a response to workplace conflict is my need to distinguish the word blame from accountability and responsibility. I may be responsible for and able to account for an act that leads to difficulties, or a disagreement, but it may not be that I did anything deliberately malicious or careless in the lead-up to that act. It may have arisen out of innocent ignorance or simply been an unavoidable mistake. Circumstances, or my lack of skill, knowledge or understanding may have meant I was the one who was instrumental in a conflict occurring, but I may not have been able to act in any other way.
To seek to blame me with all the negative connotations and consequences the word blame carries with it is ultimately ineffective as it reduces the likelihood of me learning, developing or growing from the situation.
A no-blame approach to conflict situations was originally developed as a means of responding to bullying behavior in schools. In Crying for Help: The No Blame Approach to Bullying, authors George Robinson and Barbara Maines take the view that simply punishing a bully is a short-term suppression of a bigger problem and therefore is ultimately ineffective. A punishment-focused or blame approach does not enable the bully to learn about the consequences of their actions nor does it give an opportunity for the victim to express their thoughts and feelings to the bully, whether directly or indirectly, about how the bully’s actions affected them. Instead of learning how to act differently in the future, the behavior is suppressed, and at root nothing changes, leaving the victim to handle the consequences alone.
If blame and punishment, rather than learning and change, are the focus of the resolution, it is far more likely that the bullying will return at a later date. It is often found that bullies have, themselves, been bullied in the past and see their actions as normal because they have never learned to act any differently.
When applying this thinking to any conflict situation in the workplace, the focus becomes one of learning from mistakes, disagreements or failures. This applies whether the conflict arises from a miscommunication, a lost contract, a missed deadline, a computer system failure, etc. The most successful, and the most sustainable, organizations adopt approaches that welcome failure and mistakes as opportunities for learning. This can be as relevant to workplace relationships as it is to workplace systems, technologies, procedures, etc.
So how do you practice a no-blame approach to conflict?
Consider any situation involving workplace conflict that you have experienced, or may still be experiencing, and ask yourself the following questions:
- Is the focus on “Who did it?” rather than “What happened?” or “How did it happen?&rdquo When a conflict arises, and someone involved is challenged or labelled as incompetent, useless or another more derogatory term, the focus shifts from what happened, and the events and actions that led it to happen are ignored. To focus on understanding what happened rather than who did it allows for reflection and learning as well as a more constructive use of energy. This approach is also described as challenging the behavior, not the person. This strategy effectively avoids the condemnation, resentment, denial and defensiveness a blame approach can cause.
- In your organization, is it OK to make mistakes? This does not mean a careless attitude is accepted but that mistakes are seen as opportunities for learning. If mistakes repeatedly happen, then they are not being learned from. However, even worse is a work environment where it is not OK to make mistakes and the very occurrence of one is subject to cover-ups, denials and a tendency to pass the buck—three very common strategies found in a blame culture. This strategy leads to continuous repetition of a problem or conflict as neither is openly acknowledged. If this is common in your workplace, someone needs to take a leadership role in creating a workplace environment that allows openness about mistakes without seeking to condemn those who make them.
- Is there a fear that a strategy that calls itself a “no-blame approach” will descend into chaos and abuse or apathy and disaster? If so, what does that say about the level of trust, respect and cooperation that presently exists in your organization? It is almost certain that an organization that has such an ethos will be one that fears risk-taking, policy changes and innovation. Ultimately this type of organization stagnates and dies.
Conflict is inevitable. When approached correctly, it can provide many opportunities for organizational learning and growth. Seeking to blame others for conflicts is an enormous drain on resources and an inhibitor to creativity and growth. A no-blame approach provides a more creative, constructive and realistic response to the inevitable.
Alan Sharland is a mediator, conflict coach, and trainer in communication and conflict resolution skills. He is director of Hillingdon Community Mediation in West London, and has worked in mediation for 15 years in various fields, including health care, university student complaints, disability discrimination, and workplace and neighbor disputes. His web site, www.communicationandconflict.com, promotes mindful communication and growth through conflict. |
|
