Conflict as Catalyst: How Consultants Drive Positive Change in the Workplace
In these ever-changing tumultuous times, workplace conflict is a fact. Positive conflict is viewed as creative and innovative when the outcome of conflicting views is used to solve a problem. Hence, conflicts can be constructive and destructive, providing organizations with the opportunity or initiative to change and evolve. Unfortunately, at times we seem to experience destructive conflict in the workplace that can be rooted in power struggles and personal and team conflicts, often highlighting the misalignment of needs, goals, expectations and aspirations. In a survey of 3,500 UK workers by Mercer Human Resources Consulting, common behaviours defining workplace conflict are (in order of highest occurrence): someone withholding information which affects performance, having one's opinions and views ignored, being given unreasonable or impossible targets or deadlines, and being exposed to an unmanageable workload. Hiring consultants with expertise in understanding these issues can improve interpersonal relationships and positively affect an organization's bottom line to address these complex workplace conflicts.
To address these complex workplace conflicts and challenges, we must build on a respected and trustworthy relationship between a consultant and client to work within the organization and get to the root of issues and possible systemic challenges. Establishing a solid consulting contract detailing key roles, responsibilities, and deliverables is fundamental to success and choosing the appropriate process a of consulting provides insight into the role's impact on organizational development and effectiveness.
Consulting across many disciplines and industries is prevalent because of the highly valued expertise and impact the right consultant can provide. Consultants bring a balance of academics and practice with a robust suite of skills like strategic big-picture perspective, specialized disciplines and often industry-specific skillsets, and a wealth of practical experience.
While a plethora of consulting processes is presented in the literature, there is a general consistency of four steps based on Bowen's theory. These four steps are 1. Enter and Contract, 2. Gather and Analyze, 3. Intervene, and 4. Evaluate and Close. Part 1 of this paper will address the four steps, focussing on on steps one and two leading to a sample consultation agreement, represented by a proposal for a workplace assessment (Appendix A). Part 2 of this paper will introduce two common workplace conflict resolution consulting services with an example.
Background
Turner (1982) identified a consulting purpose hierarchy into two areas: traditional purposes and additional goals. The traditional purposes can be defined as providing requested information, providing a solution to a given problem, conducting a diagnosis that may redefine the problem, providing recommendations and assisting implementation. The additional goals include building consensus and commitment, facilitating client learning, and improving organizational effectiveness. Leading consulting services of today focus on the additional goals by leveraging the foundational information gained by implementing the traditional purposes.
Interestingly, Verocca (1998) provides a brief history highlighting a key transition in the work of a consultant by stating,
"It is evident through the work of Argyris and others that humans relations theory has had a profound impact on the role of consultants. Indeed, it could be argued that in much the same way that Frederick W. Taylor was seen as the father of the scientific management approach to consulting, so too Argyris may be described as the father of organizational development (O.D.) or process consulting. Many of the problems which OD consultants are hired to solve today relate to issues identified by Argyris, such as the conflict between formal organization and individual growth, the existence of informal organizational structure, and the differences between perceived behavior and actual behavior. Based on such work, consultants began to develop approaches that no longer simply handed clients solutions to their organizational problems. Rather, clients themselves were asked to help identify the problems and develop strategies for solution. This way the consultant had changed from a role of "provider" to one of "facilitator."
The role of the consultant has been expanded immensely over time to include the traditional purposes identified by Turner, which exhibit more control by the consultant, to a scope of power that leverages empowerment. The control roles include technical or industrial specialist, advocate or persuader, doer, and veto role. To leverage the empowerment role of a consultant today, they wear many hats, including: questioner, process specialist, product specialist, researcher, trainer or educator, and problem-solving collaborator. A consultant must reflect on the most useful role for the issue or situation. Long (1999) states, "The better you understand your client, the better you can choose an appropriate role as a consultant; the better you understand the implications of the role you choose, the more value you will be able to create for your client."
